

P it 


:-S 


ll 


■; 7 i - 

■Jj ■ 

•ij* 


m 


$ 

’if J 

V 2 

1 i 

-’ ■* 


r 


i v l 


: 

' /ir<»<-T<-<L Aa>.« .<<k. 


: 




j $ 


iiifev 


i 


a 


y 


■. 

§: 

If 




p 

v ];> -*4. /*, 

^ t; >, ^ *%., 




I 


14 




1 




A 

s* 




4 . j€ 

>■■ M 4 

1 v 


4 


/ r 


#1 

■ 

<> 

‘ V. ,J» r : ; 

A 




i ' ; 

( i 'V.« VJVfc- 

I .1 


f. 1 : . £| 

yil 


/A 

9 .. 3fc 


m 

P 



«4 







,\V 'J'- * 

■ ^ ^ 

. * .A & * i 

** <y 

^ ■-' v * 

; • y ®o' : 

* ‘, V - Zf o v ^ ^ 

„ ^ '*■"•' / 
f- o v . s 

M O .£> V 

f/V Vv W * < 


vwv 

0 ? v * v ■ " « ^ s\ x t 0 N c * ^ * S S ^ 

:• * + ,**? * c ^ V , p 

: A v w : 

^ • 


V* s S * ■ t . ^ 3 N " . tt n ~t- " 8 1 A " V 

, 'V V V W*w'' ' A' * 'c Y'Vs’ 

i ; •%f f-t|: :gi 

Wj -.^IvV ^ V \ '»%£F * v'% ZvW 

■'' ^ ."** ^ '“’ '* a a n V <° V , c '".' 

r° ^ V^zo ^ -y ^ aV c 0 c ♦ O (V * v 1 8 4 <*» 


^° V % *’♦«,-*•' V# 

* 0 'A* ■ 1 * \ V * * » 

°' \' 


A V ^ 


s ^ 0 ^ U * v ‘ ■• « ^ 

rP ^ ^ ,a> * 

' + ■ r .V ,J 

'. •" ^ r - :. 

'.* 0 >°% y 

i ’ , 0 - o *" * ' ^ 

9 " * Y ‘ 0 / " / c- * ' ' \> ^ s * 

k /^r, ^ .v ^ ^ . 

^ ° v> <sr ° ^ ® - <> -*> 

z 

n 


* ■) \ 0 


✓' »\iCv\\t > 

r^j. y v '' * (S) 

/v-yv 


a* ^ 








f}* y . \ 

* .A O ** / c x 


A o'* 


A ' " ' ' 

% V, VJ - 

- +* V s 

i°°<. - . , 

.' r, ' c , «K 

:> n ° ’ A 0 “?/. 'll'* s » » 

°-p v''^aL\ > 

* -v. v a 




So* K+ A 
, ^ / 

* ^ . 


AA - ^ V" 



3 > -V - 

0 s c * ’ f b § v *^*< 



'>* V 

o 0 


^ * / 


.»' .<.'*• 

1 vV>'‘.*'. 



** , <x «0 

c° NG * '© AV . 

* _C-S4XV .. ^ '-> 0 ,* 

<c . - -‘ ^ 

^ vX v 

, ^ , _* « O 0 N * J 

•\ -f " =» \0 c? ,, * 4-7” 

Cl' r A- > % ' o , ° \ ^ V v SZvmM q\ a*, y 

~ V. y «fA - As- ^ j. <-7^///i'jA f . \ v ^ 

. , , 0 k o v> S ' > 

A /A *- - - « 'fi A V ^hcARL 

^/> .W' ° 

z. - z 

C 

V> -Si ° 

« »■* 

<\ y ° * * * A 

4 ^ A' 

-tf o 



0 * X 



A 0, 0 o' A 

!.' . A. *° A A‘ 



’ ' J 5 v A 



' x o o N 



>V A\ **• 

^ V ° t 
* 


\V ' * 
z 


A ^ O 

? <?• * 



o ^ A 


0 ^ X 


A 


•^ v \ . 




^ y <y NNJ ^'o < ‘ ^0 
A 5 N 0 0 V 

A 


^ £ 

s * 0 * 8 1 1 * \ s * * f 

^ x 0 f C^ V „ s ^ ? -v 

A XV ~ ^ A 

,J ln <^ * - i >- v - c -- 

A ^f, O w// )J|^. \\w A > 

' * j *v Js^\k ^ A v ■> 

•V 


,\V <P- 

sv 


* 1 1 8 « 'V. " c 

*f ^ ,(P o 

•f a\ <s 

o" jPA 



• O ** , c S -0 A 

O^C'x, ^ ** rtf *V'»* 4 

^ 4 



' • " • >° 
*' 



-, 




* * * 0 r 


* * 


** 


✓ 
O, 

0 N c 4 

^ o 
✓ 



A» ^ <V» ^ 

\« a ^ : 


u 


Co 3 ^ o 

* A? <<' 

s s v 



A rP c* t 

4 ° . * 0 . ^/. ♦•!■»* 

A> 0 ‘ ^ CA 

4 ~ 0 > ?• (3 51 * -<> 

v %. ^ %, 


K V Aa 


0 n o 



V v 


z 



*. 


' A 0 v 

rs v •> ' 





r\v ■> ' 1 8 4 ~ 

0 ° A -z^- ^ - * 


0 9 \ 


‘bo ’ 1 




v 1 « 



* <’A. > ”.4*^. * flfc* Mure ' ■><• ,J '4/ . 

'A> "*’ >A * l,, » A '“”'* a' 

V C */ 5 w 25 S*. A ' 

oo N * ff k; :: '- : A v : • 

/ ^ ° 10<5i *■ 

^ > ^ J . 4 °° *"*?o*' x^ %••, ^^oTo' 5 * 4 O 0 C ^ y 

N .o^ f' \ >> ALrmL*, > +"°**o 

* ^ A - A ./ • - A ^ 

7 Lr ■ Vnt—d^ S 

& ^ 

^ i ^ 0 > ^ % •=■ V > 

v -b A (5 As A y 0» 1 > < 'A O ^ , S S \G 

'A 0,1 o' c“ N0 * A 0^ v*'"* A A c° KC * ^b .<$ 

*i f A j 0 * js* 72 ?fc, * V A /rfssw^'. ,J> 0 < 


A 

"Vf. V 



*- 


aV <p^ 






*, a A w -J>^ 

*4 * 


v* v 5 






o o’ 


* 8 I t * 


*»•/ »' *«, A 

A A- .y 

$> £>' * jA\W/%_ 0 ^r> ,<v 




, ^ , 4°°^ 

^ '* 3 ■• ’* -o 0 A *■* 

T ff > 0 V „ K 0 0 ^ ^~V 

^ t A y *. Ac <;> <» 'p 

■%c A * r ^‘a aV * 


•< 


.>^ v 



o' a j , 

A A ck -i 

1 ,u v' x » S V'^ a 

' s 

<* 


z 


A. 








































































JAMES W. LOWBER 






World-wide Problems 


or 

Macrocosmus 


BY 

JAMES WILLIAM LOWBER 

\\ 

M.A., LL. D., Ph. D., Sc. D., Litt. D., F. A. A., F. R. G. S., F. R. S. A. 
Member of the Royal Societies and Authors’ Clubs, London. 
Member of the French Academy of International History. 


The author uses the term “Macrocosmus” as referring to the great uni 
verse of matter and mind, and includes in it the Macrocos¬ 
mus. Dean Swift says: “Philosophers say that man is a 
Macrocosmus, or little world, resembling in 
miniature every part of the great world.” 



CINCINNATI, O. 

THE STANDARD PUBLISHING COMPANY 




Copyright, 1923. by 
J. W. Lowber. 


< « 


JUL 

C1A711083 


rv-® \ 


On account of 
their great help in bring¬ 
ing this book before the public, 

I dedicate it to my special friends 

D. C. REED, M. H. REED 

AND 

A. J. EILERS 



* 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 


Preface ... vii 

Sketch by Mrs. J. W. Lowber, A.M. ix 

Introduction . xxi 


BOOK I. 

The Greatest Scientific and Philosophical Problems of the Ages. 


Chapter I. The Problem of Theism. 1 

“ II. The Problem of Creation. 13 

‘ ‘ III. Problems in the Higher Criticism. 26 

11 IV. The Problems of Christology... 40 

“ V. The Problems of Revelation and Inspiration. 51 

1 ‘ VI. The Problem of Evil. 58 

“ VII. The Problem of Unbelief. 65 

“ VIII. The Problem of a Future State. 74 


BOOK II. 

The Greatest Social and Political Problems of the Age. 


Chapter I. The Labor Problem. 85 

“ II. The Marriage Problem. 99 

“ III. The Liquor Problem. 109 

“ IV. The Sunday Problem. j... 118 

“ V. The Problems of the City. 125 

‘ 1 VI. The Problems of Education. 136 

11 VII. The Problems of the Home. 154 

“ VIII. The Crime Problem. 172 

“ IX. The Problems of the Church. 188 

‘ ‘ X. The Problems of the State. 200 


BOOK III. 

The Golden Mean Philosophy in the Solution of the Greatest 

Problems. 

Part I. The Greatest Problems in Biology, Anthropology, Philosophy and 


Sociology. 

Chapter 1. The Greatest Problems in Biology. 219 

‘ ‘ II. The Greatest Problems in Anthropology. 229 

‘ ‘ III. The Greatest Problems in Philosophy. 242 

‘ ‘ IV. The Greatest Problems in Sociology. 259 




























VI 


CONTENTS 


Part II. The Greatest Problems in Theology. 


Chapter I. The Philosophy of Religion. 273 

‘ ‘ II. Genesis and Geology. 283 

“ III. The Philosophy of Christianity. 292 

“ IV. Tennyson’s Science of Religion..:. 300 

11 V. Robert Browning’s Philosophy of Religion. 312 


BOOK IV. 

Important Problems in Literature, Art and Civilization. 


Chapter I. John Rusk in and His Problems. 327 

‘ 1 II. Thomas Carlyle and His Problems. 335 

** III. Victor Hugo and His Problems. 344 


BOOK V. 

Problems of the University and Rationalism. 


Chapter I. Problems of the University and Civilization. 351 

II. Problems of Rationalism and Civilization. 363 

III. Problems of the Future Life and Civilization. 378 

IV. God in History and Civilization. 391 

li V. The Geographical March of Civilization. 415 

BOOK VI. 

The Important Problems of the Great War . 441 
















PREFACE 


We have chosen World-wide Problems for the title of this 
enlarged book “ Macrocosmus, ’ 7 as the subtitle runs through the 
entire work. We have added over one hundred pages to the 
new book, and feel quite confident that they will greatly in¬ 
crease its value. The author calls his philosophy the “ Golden 
Mean Philosophy.” For more than fifty years he has been a 
Masonic lecturer, and has taken all the degrees in both the 
York and Scottish Rites. In 1921 he was made a Knight 
Commander of the Court of Honor (K. C. C. H.). He is also 
Past Chief Patriarch of the Odd Fellows, and retired Captain 
of the Canton; Past Chancellor of the Knights of Pythias; 
life member of the Elks, and Noble of the Mystic Shrine. All 
these orders have an open Bible, and seek the golden mean. 
Like Paul, they prove all things and hold fast to the good. 

The first edition of this work has been commended by 
leading critics in all parts of the world, and for this we are 
profoundly thankful. We can not otherwise than be hopeful 
in reference to the success of this greatly improved work. 
It is really a new book. A great critic says that it is largely 
an epic on Christ, the Bible and science. 


The Author. 



SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 

I begin this sketch in May, 1921, when my husband has 
passed, by several months, his seventy-fourth year. I was 
married July 4, 1882, and since that time I personally know 
the facts of which I speak. This year is the fifty-sixth anni¬ 
versary of my husband as a minister, and his fifty-eighth as 
an educator. He began teaching before he was sixteen, and 
preaching before he was eighteen. 

EARLY LIFE AND EDUCATION. 

My husband was brought up in Nelson County, Ky., and I 
was brought up in Mercer County. Only Washington County 
was between us. He writes thus of his early education: 
“The first school I attended was in a little log schoolhouse 
about two miles from home. A doctor from Illinois began the 
school and taught a few weeks; but he soon quit and a lady 
took his place and finished the school. All boys desire to be 
men, but it is difficult in after life to think of anything more 
pleasant than school days. The next school I attended was in 
Washington County in a log schoolhouse similar to the first 
one. The benches were without backs, and our feet could not 
reach the floor. Lincoln said that a man’s legs should be long 
enough to reach the ground, but ours would not reach the floor. 
In about ten months I returned to Nelson County, and 
attended a winter school at Chaplin, taught by a Dr. Lewis. 
At the close of the session, I gave a recitation on the West, 
and have been interested in the great West ever since. My 
next school was in Washington County, but a different part 
of the county, and I had an excellent teacher by the name of 
John R. More. By this time I was about twelve years old and 
had gone through, Ray’s arithmetic, third part, and Butler’s 
English grammar. I was quite familiar with both of them. 
My next school was taught by William Calvert, and he was 
also a fine teacher. I next attended an academy under Professor 
Gardner, and began the study of Latin. He greatly en¬ 
couraged me in my work, and suggested that I study law. 

ix 


X 


SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 


This had much to do in my graduating in law afterwards, 
although I never practiced law. At the close of this school I 
recited the entire oration of Thomas F. Marshall on the death 
of Richard F. Menafee. Professor Gardner, many years after¬ 
wards, wrote me in reference to my encouraging progress at 
his school. My next school was at Chaplin and taught by a Pro¬ 
fessor Linsey, a graduate of the University of North Carolina. 
He gave me such a thorough drill in Latin that I never after¬ 
wards had any difficulty with the language. My last teacher, 
before I entered Kentucky University, was Austin Taylor, a 
graduate of Bethany College, West Virginia. He baptized 
me, and his influence caused me to become a minister. He 
prepared me for the university, and I assisted him in his 
school. I taught in public school nearly two years before I 
went to the university, and although I was in my teens it is 
claimed that 1 governed schools that even men in middle life 
had to abandon. While I did not spare the rod, I made 
friends of the students.” 

My husband matriculated in Kentucky University in the 
fall of 1866, and was a student in this great institution three 
years. He knew Champ Clark, Lane Allen, and many others 
who have become distinguished. He studied in all three of the 
leading colleges of this institution; viz., College of Arts, A. 
and M. College, and the College of the Bible. He took seven 
and eight studies each year. He thus gives his experience: “I 
belonged to the geology class in the A. and M. College, organ¬ 
ized by the celebrated Alexander Winchell. I took more in- 
terest in this class from the fact that, when a boy, I read 
many books on natural science, and, like Charles Darwin, 
became much interested in Palev’s ‘Natural Theology.’ I heard 
Dr. Winchell lecture on ‘Geology and Genesis,’ and became 
so much interested that T have continued the study even up 
to the present time. Prof. John Nevell. Greek professor in 
the College of Arts, was so thorough that I .acquired a knowl¬ 
edge of Greek that enabled me ever afterwards to handle the 
language without difficulty. T taught Greek and Latin six 
years. Pres. R. Graham, of the College of Arts, greatly 
helped me in English, and after l became an author he favor¬ 
ably reviewed my books. Pres. Robert Milligan, of the 


SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 


XI 


College of the Bible, was one of the finest Hebrew scholars I 
have ever met, and he enabled me to acquire a knowledge of 
the Hebrew language that laid the foundation of my future 
Semitic studies. Prof. John W. McGarvey was noted for 
applying the inductive method to the study of the Bible. He 
was a great teacher.” 

My husband had to make his own expenses at college, and 
found a good opportunity to do this at Indianapolis; so in the 
fall of 1869 he entered the Northwestern Christian (now 
Butler) University. He had completed the classical course in 
the College of the Bible at Kentucky University, and was able 
to enter the Junior Class at Butler. He took his A.B. degree 
in 1871, and received his A.M. degree in 1874. I now let 
him speak for himself: 

“Fortunately, I was able to enter the Junior Class in nearly 
all my studies, but, as there were many extras I wanted to 
take, I usually had seven and eight studies. By hard work I 
was able to get 100 in nearly all my studies. I was 
also selected as tutor of Greek. 1 had a minister in my Greek 
class about ten years older than myself. One day he came up 
to me and said: ‘ If I ever learn Greek, I will have to learn it in 
heaven; I can not learn it on earth.’ I was much interested 
in all my professors at Indianapolis, and especially Pres. 
O. A. Burgess, who was also our leading professor in philoso¬ 
phy. While at Indianapolis I also, especially during vacations, 
took extensive evangelistic tours, and spent one summer in 
Minnesota. By the time I was ready to take my A.B. degree, 
I had added hundreds of persons to the church, and had re¬ 
ceived numerous calls to both pastoral and evangelistic work.” 

In the fall of 1872 my husband matriculated at Harvard 
University as a resident graduate, intending to take his Ph.D. 
His work at Kentucky University and Butler was such that 
the authorities at Harvard told him that he would be on a 
footing with the Harvard graduates. On account of financial 
disappointment and the heavy expenses at Harvard, he felt 
compelled to accept an invitation to fill the pulpit of the 
First Congregation of Disciples, Pittsburgh, Pa. He con¬ 
sequently did not enter upon his course at Harvard, but spent 
about four months in the study of actual work performed by 


Xii SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 

Harvard and Boston Universities. He attended several lec¬ 
ture courses while in Massachusetts, and really made a study 
of educational work. He bought all the books he could find 
pertaining to philosophy and history, in which branches he 
intended to take his Ph.D. Many years afterward he 
completed the post-graduate courses at the University of 
Texas in philosophy and political science under Dr. Sidney E. 
Mezes and Dr. David F. Houston. They were both post¬ 
graduates of Harvard. So he really got the Harvard courses 
after all. 

In 1880, after a two years’ course of study directed by Dr. 
Charles W. Bennett, lie passed his examination for Ph.D. at 
Syracuse University, New York. His subjects were history 
and philosophy. His final examination lasted twenty-five 
hours, and Dr. Bennett thus speaks of him: “The examination 
was thorough, and revealed a thoroughness and comprehensive¬ 
ness of scholarship which justly entitles him to his high honor." 

In 1880 he also delivered an address at Kentucky Uni¬ 
versity, and received the Classical Biblical Diploma from the 
College of the Bible. 

My husband has continued his post-graduate studies through 
life, and he still continues them. He attended courses of lec¬ 
tures in the different departments of the University of Texas 
about twenty years. He has also taken a number of courses 
in the University of Chicago. He fully prepared himself for 
examination at the University of London for Doctor of Science 
in the social and political sciences. As he could not arrange 
his affairs to go over there at the time desired, he passed his 
examination at the University of Wooster, Ohio. He received 
the degree of Doctor of Science with the cum laude. I do not 
suppose there has ever lived a harder student and more 
diligent investigator than my husband. He has visited, and 
in some way come in contact with, all the great universities 
in both this country and Europe. 

• AS AN EDUCATOR. 

My husband began teaching before he was sixteen years of 
age, and taught all the way from the common schools to the 
presidency of a college and chancellor of a university. He 


SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 


XI11 


was principal of institutions in Pennsylvania and New York 
for a number of years, and was, at one time, president of 
Columbia College, Kentucky. lie was five years chancellor 
of Texas Christian University, and when the chancellorship 
was abolished, the trustees of the institution unanimously 
urged him to take the presidency of the institution. I well 
remember that they were after him three times, but his en¬ 
gagements were such that he could not accept. He was, how¬ 
ever, director of the post-graduate department ten years, and 
the special lecturer of the university twenty-one years. 

My husband has always, in some way, been connected with 
one or more colleges and universities. For fifty years he has 
lectured at some college or university. During the twelve 
years he was pastor in Austin, he delivered from two to three 
hundred chapel addresses at the State University. He also, in 
his church, started a lecture course in the interest of the 
students that finally led to the establishment of the Texas Bible 
Chair. Mrs. Moses, president of the Christian Woman’s Board 
of Missions, offered to make him instructor of the Bible £hair, 
but his work would not admit of his accepting it. While he 
was University Chancellor, he was awarded the diploma of 
Fellow by the Educational Institute of Scotland, Edinburgh. 
This is considered one of the greatest institutions of its kind 
in the world. He has also, for a number of years, been a mem¬ 
ber of the National Educational Association. He is also a 
member of the American Historical Association. 

AS SCHOLAR AND INVESTIGATOR. 

My husband has probably been elected to as many learned 
societies in both this country and Europe as has almost any 
other American. In 1887 he was elected an Associate of 
Victoria Institute, or Philosophical Society of Great Britain, 
London, and he has faithfully kept up with its work from that 
day to this. About the same time he was elected a member 
of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 
Philadelphia, and has kept up with its work. He has also 
held membership in the American Political Science Associa¬ 
tion, the American Economic Association, and the American 
Sociological Society, For a number of years he was an active 


XIV 


SKETCH BY MRS. .J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 


member of the Navy League, and made a special study of 
naval power. 

In 1896 my husband was elected a Fellow of the famous 
Royal Geographical Society, London, and he has diligently 
studied the sciences connected with and related to the work 
of this great institution. In 1907 he received the diploma of 
Fellow of the Royal Scottish Geographical Society, with the 
name of the celebrated James Geikie, of the University of 
Edinburgh, as its president. He has also, for many years, 
been a member of the National Geographical Society, Washing¬ 
ton, I). C. He is a member of the New York Academy of 
Political Science, Columbia University. 

My husband, in January, 1902 (which included also 1901, 
as the annual meeting is in February), became a Fellow of the 
Royal Astronomical Society, London, the greatest in the world. 
He has been a student in astronomy ever since his boyhood, 
and completed mathematical astronomy in the university. 
About the same time he also became a Fellow of the Royal 
Meteorological Society, the greatest society of its kind in 
the world. He had been interested in meteorology ever since 
he knew Professor Loomis at Yale. In 1905 he was elected a 
member of the American Mathematical Society, and soon 
after this a member of the Circolo Matematico di Palermo, 
Italia. The same year he also received the diploma of mem¬ 
bership from the Societe Astronomique de France, Paris. 

I will not pretend to give all the learned societies to 
which my husband was elected, and he frequently remarked 
that he was surprised himself. T do not give the names of 
even all that he accepted membership in, and he rejected 
probably as many as he accepted. I must, however, mention 
the Royal Society of Arts, of which he is a Fellow and to 
which Benj. Franklin belonged in 1754. It is certainly the 
greatest society of its kind in the world, and it has the repu¬ 
tation of starting the first international exposition in the 
world. At that time the husband of Queen Victoria was its 
president. My husband is councilor of both the American 
Institute of Civics and the American Civic Association. 
Also of the North British Academy. In 1906 he was elected 
a member of the Royal Asiatic Society, and the same year a 


SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 


XV 


Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of 
Science. In 1905 he became a member of the Royal Societies 
Club, London. In 1907 he was made a Fellow of the Society 
of Antiquaries, Scotland, and in 1905 a member of the 
American Anthropological Association. He became a mem¬ 
ber of the Authors Club, London, in 1913. He is also a life 
member of the French Academy of International History. 

AS A MINISTER. 

My husband began preaching in 1865, a few months before 
he was eighteen years of age. He has been both pastor and 
evangelist, and has thus far added to the church 12,587 per¬ 
sons, of whom more than five thousand were by confession 
and baptism. He was pastor forty years—even when he was 
college president he also preached for a church. He was a 
regular preacher in the following cities: Noblesville, Ind.; 
he supplied the pulpit three months at St. Peters, Minn.; he 
supplied four months in Boston, Mass.; he was pastor one 
year in Pittsburgh, Pa., and three years in Scranton; he 
preached three years at Portlandville, N. Y.; at Columbia, 
Lancaster, Louisville and Paducah, Ky., he was pastor 
nearly seven years; he was pastor in Fort Worth, Tex., 
over five years, and in Galveston, Tex., nearly four years. 
His last pastorate was in Austin, Tex., where he preached 
twelve years. He also preached at different places while in 
college, thus making his pastoral work fully forty years. 
Nearly everywhere he preached he either built a new house 
of worship or repaired an old one. He greatly increased the 
membership wherever he preached, and prepared the way for 
his successor to receive a larger salary than himself. He 
usually, also, had a mission wherever he preached. During 
the fifty-six years of his ministry he held one or more pro¬ 
tracted meetings each year, either in his own church or some¬ 
where else. 

In his long ministry as pastor and educator, my husband 
was never a candidate for any position, but was called by 
both church and college without having ever applied for a 
position. During the twelve years we have traveled, he has 
received several calls, but decided not to take local work 


XVI 


SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 


again. In our twelve years’ travel we have not visited a 
place where we did not find some one he had baptized, or 
had belonged to some church where he preached. 

LECTURER AND AUTHOR. 

My husband became a lecturer in early life. In fact, he 
began the study of elocution and oratory in his Freshman 
year, and has kept it up through life. His popular lectures 
have been quite a source of income, but he has delivered 
many more lectures for nothing than the number he has been 
paid for. Ever since his graduation at college, he has lec¬ 
tured at different colleges and universities; and, as a rule, 
he has delivered several courses a year. He and I have 
usually attended both the State and General Missionary 
Conventions, and in most cases he has been on the program. 
A few years ago he lectured at the National Lectureship at 
Chicago, and at one time he was president of the Texas 
Christian Missionary Convention. M T e are both life directors 
of the American Board. 

My husband has lectured in nearly all the States and 
leading cities of the Union, and I have usually given read¬ 
ings at his lectures. Early in life he became a temperance 

lecturer, and finally started a social reform movement that 

% 

has had an extended influence. Thus far (1921) over thirty- 
six thousand persons have taken his social reform pledge 
and agreed to live higher social and spiritual lives. His 
pledge is printed in the seventh and eighth editions, also 
the ninth and tenth editions, of his book entitled “The 
Devil in Modern Society.” He has used his social reform 
work quite a good deal with his revival work, and it has 
thus greatly contributed to his evangelistic success. 

My husband, for more than fifty years (now 1921), has 
lectured for the Free Masons and other fraternal orders. He 
is a life member of the Masons, ex-Prelate of the Knights 
Templar, thirty-second degree and Knight Commander of the 
Court of Honor, Scottish Rite, and Noble of the Mystic Shrine, 
lie is Past Chief Patriarch of the Odd Fellows and Captain 
in Canton, Past Chancellor of the Knights of Pythias, and 
life member of the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks. 


SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 


XVII 


He lias studied with much care fraternalism and its relation¬ 
ship to the church. He has always maintained that these 
orders are auxiliary to the church, and, wisely used, are very 
helpful. 

My husband was an editor about five years, and this work 
did much to prepare him for authorship. I will only mention 
here a few of his leading books. His “Struggles and Triumphs 
of the Truth ’ ’ was published in 1888, and it met with very 
encouraging success. It is a kind of philosophy of church 
history, and discusses the great religious and political move¬ 
ments connected with the progress of Christianity. The third 
edition of this work has been published, and two hundred 
pages have been added. The first edition of “The Devil in 
Modern Society” was also published in 1888. This book has 
been enlarged three times, and it has now reached its tenth 
edition. “Cultura; or, The Relationship of Culture to 
Christianity,” was published in 1889. It is a work of more 
than five hundred pages, and it gained quite a reputation in 
Europe as well as in this country. It has been used in colleges 
and by literary clubs, and quoted by heroes in works of fiction. 
“Macrocosmus; or, Hints Towards the Solution of Greatest 
Problems,” has been very popular with professional men, and 
the leading fraternal orders have taken much interest in it. 
‘ ‘ Thought and Religion; or, The Mutual Contributions of 
Philosophy and Theology,” passed the Boston critics and has 
been published in Boston and London. “The Highest Culture 
and Christianity”—seven hundred pages—has appeared from 
the press. It consists of “Cultura” and about two hundred 
additional pages. “The Bible Doctrine of the Future” has 
reached its third edition. “Who and What of the Disciples” 
has reached its fifth edition. “World-wide Problems” is his 
last book. 

MY HUSBAND AS A TRAVELER. 

Before my marriage to Dr. Lowber in 1882, he had traveled 
quite extensively in the United States and Canada. He had 
attended the Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia, and was 
so much pleased that he resolved to attend all the great ex¬ 
positions so far as possible. He had great faith in their edu- 


XV111 


SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 


cational value. After our marriage we lived nearly two years 
in Lancaster, Ky., where lie was pastor. During the time we 
visited the Southern Exposition in Louisville, Ky. We both 
took great interest in it, and really made it a study. While 
he was pastor in Louisville, we visited the great Southern Ex¬ 
position in New Orleans. Not only was the exposition highly 
educational, but also the tour through the Southern States. 
Our next location was in Paducah, Ky., and we soon began to 
prepare a tour. The result was we went on the Ohio River to 
Cincinnati, and thence by rail to Chautauqua, N. Y. After 
spending some time there and at Niagara, we went to New 
York, and attended, at Key East, N. J., the American Insti¬ 
tute of Christian Philosophy. 

In January, 1888, we moved from Paducah, Ky., to Fort 
Worth, Tex., where my husband was pastor five years. We 
made some very interesting tours during that time, as he was 
also a lecturer and an evangelist. We attended nearly all the 
expositions in both Dallas and San Antonio, and also made an 
• extensive tour through California and the great West. 

In the spring of 1893 my husband resigned in Fort Worth, 
and accepted the chancellorship of Texas Christian University. 
This required him to deliver each year two courses of lectures 
at the university and direct the post-graduate and correspond¬ 
ence courses. The American Christian Missionary Society 
also engaged him as their representative in Galveston, where 
he built a new church. Wc made our home in Galveston 
nearly four years, and, in addition to attending a number of 
conventions and lectureships, we also made a number of tours. 
Our great trip, however, was to the great Columbian Exposi¬ 
tion in Chicago. We quite well agreed that its educational 
value was equal to two years’ post-graduate work at a great 
university. 

In 1897 we moved to Austin, Tex., where my husband built 
a new church, and was pastor twelve years. During the time 
we visited Mexico, spending twelve days in the city. We also 
attended the International Exposition in St. Louis, and the 
Congress of Arts and Sciences, of which my husband was a 
member., which, in many respects, surpassed all previous ex¬ 
positions. In 1907 we took our great educational tour through 


SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 


XIX 


Europe. We went through Canada to New York, and to Europe 
on the Hellig* Olav, ” of the Danish American line, north 
of Scotland, first landing at Christiansaund and Christiania, 
Norway. From Norway we went to Copenhagen, Denmark. 
We went from Copenhagen to Berlin, Germany, crossing the 
Baltic Sea. After spending some time at Berlin and Potsdam, 
we went to Dresden, Saxony, and from Dresden to Prague, 
Bohemia. We next visited the great city of Vienna, where 
we spent a number of days. From Vienna we went to Italy, 
visiting Venice, Rome, Florence, Como, and Italian lakes, and 
from Italy to Luzerne, Switzerland. After spending some days 
here we proceeded still farther, over the Alps to Heidelberg, 
Germany, where we greatly enjoyed the old castle and uni¬ 
versity. We went down the Rhine from Mayence to Cologne, 
where we stopped off to see the great cathedral. We next 
went to Amsterdam, and from Amsterdam to The Hague, 
where the peace conference was meeting. From Holland we 
went to Brussels, Belgium, and visited the field of Waterloo. 
Our next stop was Paris, where we spent twelve days. From 
Paris we went to London, where we remained nearly two 
weeks. We next visited Oxford, Stratford, Shakespeare’s 
home, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Old Chester, and from Liverpool we 
sailed on the “Umbria,” a Cunard liner, for New York. From 
New York we went to Washington and down the Potomac to 
Jamestown, to visit the great exposition. On our return to 
Texas, we came through Virginia and Kentucky. 

On account of ill health, my husband, in 1909, gave up all 
local work, and entered the lecture and evangelistic field. 
This year (1921) is his fifty-sixth anniversary as a minister, 
having begun his ministry before he was eighteen years of 
age. He has added to the church more than 12,500 persons, 
and nearly six thousand of these were by confession and bap¬ 
tism. More than thirty-six thousand persons have taken his 
social reform pledge and agreed to live higher social and 
spiritual lives. From 1909 to this year 1921, we have traveled 
over more than half of the States of the American Union, and 
my husband has lectured at many colleges and universities. 
He has also delivered courses of lectures in nearly all of the 
Protestant churches. Each year he has, in addition to his 


XX 


SKETCH BY MRS. J. W. LOWBER, A.M. 

social reform meetings, held one or more evangelistic meetings, 
and added a number of persons to the church. 

In July, 1915, we started to California on the Southern 
Pacific Railroad to visit the expositions at San Diego and 
San Francisco. We spent one month at these expositions, and 
we fully agreed that their educational value was superior to 
any others we had ever visited. We returned from San 
Francisco on the Northwestern Railroad, and saw as fine 
scenery as we have ever looked upon in any part of the world. 


INTRODUCTION. 


In Book First of this work, the author discusses the great¬ 
est scientific and ;philosophical problems of the age. lie fully 
believes that Christianity is essential to the solution of these 
problems. In fact, he does n'ot believe they can be solved with¬ 
out it. 

Mr. Kidd, in his “Social Evolution,” fully recognizes the 
fact that western civilization is largelv indebted to Christian- 
ity for its marvelous progress. Christianity only promotes the 
highest progress when it is in harmony with the spirit of its 
Master. The Christ is certainly the great central figure of our 
modern civilization. 

Christ is the true interpreter of God. It has been correctly 
said that man is the noblest work of God, and we can just as 
truly say that a proper conception of God is the noblest work 
of man. A true knowledge of God has been a matter of pro¬ 
gressive development. It is said that photographers can not 
take pictures of the great peaks of the Alps as a whole, but are 
compelled to take them in sections, and then put these sections 
together in order to make a complete picture. So man was not 
capable of grasping a full conception of God at once; but God 
had to gradually reveal himself to man. Revelation itself was 
progressive. As Jesus has taught, it was first the blade, then 
the ear, and afterwards the full corn in the ear. Man in the 
childhood of the race was not prepared for the full revelation 
given through the Christ. It required centuries of prepara¬ 
tion. The student of the Bible knows that Jehovah was at first 
the God of the patriarchs, the God of Abraham, the God of 
Isaac, and the God of Jacob. He was looked upon as the God 
of Abraham’s tribe, and of his posterity. When Israel became 
a nation, Jehovah became the God of the nation. While the 
prophets had a very high conception of God, it remained for 
the Christ to fully reveal unto us the true nature of the Father. 

i 


XXI 



XXII 


INTRODUCTION. 


We read in Matt. xi. 27 as follows: “Neither doth anv know 

t/ 

the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will- 
eth to reveal him.” In John i. 18 we have much the same 
thought. Jesus says: “No man hath seen God at any time; 
the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he 
hath declared him.” The New Testament certainly teaches 
that the Christ interpreted God to man in a higher light than 
he had ever been known before. lie taught the Fatherhood of 
God, and this brought God to man. The chasm between God 
and man was bridged, and God was brought to man. This 
thought has had an important influence upon the modern scien¬ 
tific doctrine of the immanence of God in nature. All modern 
culture has been greatly influenced by it. 

The doctrine of the Fatherhood of God places the divine 
personality in a higher light than ever known before. The 
Buddhists strive to get rid of personality, but Christians con¬ 
sider it their duty to develop personality. Christ came to give 
life, and to give it more abundantly. The Fatherhood of God 
involves his goodness, and his providential care of his children. 
God sends the rain upon the just and the unjust. When chil¬ 
dren ask bread, the true father will not give them a stone, nor 
will he give them a serpent when they ask meat; so the Father 
in heaven will not reject the petitions of his children. The di¬ 
vine Fatherhood also involves the love of God. We thus reach 
the very essence of God, for God is love. When man thus un¬ 
derstands the very nature of God, he is prepared for the high¬ 
est culture and civilization. Xenophon tells us that the mer¬ 
cenary troops were driven by the whip into battle. They could 
not make such soldiers as true patriots. It is better to serve 
God from fear than not to serve him at all, but those who serve 
God from love make better Christians. Hawthorne said that 
Jonathan Edwards made him fear and tremble, but that Jesus 
Fhrist made him hope and love. Jesus Christ has even taught 
our modern schools how to govern the students. 

Christ the Interpreter of Man.—I n John, the second 
chapter and twenty-fifth verse, we have the following language 


INTRODUCTION. 


XX111 


in reference to the Christ: “And because he needed not that 
any one should bear witness concerning man; for he himself 
knew what was in man. Quinet gives a good description of 
man’s relation to the universe, in the following language: “Man 
is neither the master nor the slave of nature; he is its inter¬ 
preter and living word. Man consummates the universe, and 
gives a voice to the mute creation. Man is the microeosmus, 
answering to the larger word and world of God.” Man is the 
epitome j of nature, and a mystery second only to the Deity. 
I he psychologist can no more find out the soul to perfection 
than the theologian can find out God. Science has discovered 
every continent, and explored even the head-waters of the Nile; 
but the human mind remains the terra incognita. 

The sensational philosophy of the eighteenth century great¬ 
ly degraded man, and it has had a deleterious influence upon the 
theology of the nineteenth century. We are now glad, how¬ 
ever, that theology is outgrowing this materialistic view of man, 
which only makes him an intelligent brute. Such a view of 
man tends to crime and degradation. Convince a man that 
there is nothing in him, and it is very difficult to get anything 
out. of him. It is said that a drunken gambler was once elected 
mayor of a city. He felt the responsibility, quit his old asso¬ 
ciates, had the law enforced, and became a worthy citizen. 

The Bible gives a very different view of ’man from that of 
the sensational philosophy. The eighth Psalm, according to the 
Devised Version, states that man was made onlv a little lower 
than God. This Psalm is a diamond, and the first and last 
verses are its gold setting. It teaches that man was made in 
the divine image, and shows his relationship to nature. 

In his physical make-up man is the highest animal. Where 
the intelligence of the animal ends, man begins. Instinct is 
the highest intelligence with the animal, and it is the lowest 
with man. The animal is stationary, but man is progressive. 
More than two thousand vears ago Plato described the instincts 
of the bee, and from that age to this it has not added a new idea 
to its cell. In the days of Seneca both men and women made 


XXIV 


INTRODUCTION. 


pets of monkeys. The women carried them in their laps, much 
as they do dogs at the present day. Notwithstanding such good 

environment, no monkey has ever been able to compose an ora- 

• # 

tion or write a book. 

The interpretation that Christ gives of man solves the great¬ 
est problems of modern anthropology. Jesus answers the ques¬ 
tions, W hence came man % What is man % and Whither is he 
bound ? Man came from the plastic hand of God, and was 
made in the divine image. Tie was made onlv a little lower 
than God. lie became himself a creator, and went to work at 
once to subdue nature. He became a poet, an artist and a phi¬ 
losopher. Jesus did not hold to the view of the materialistic 
philosopher, who denies the freedom of the will; but he held 
man strictly responsible for his conduct. lie taught that man 
would be a failure even if he gained the whole world, and in 
doing this lost his own soul. Jesus taught that man’s higher 
moral nature relates him to God, as the instincts of the birds 
of the air cause them, at the approach of winter, to seek a 
warmer climate. Man’s higher nature must be completed in a 
higher world, and Jesus taught that man was bound for the 
mansions above. This view of man makes him a proper subject 
for God’s revelation. It is said that when Tennvson walked 

t j 

in his arbor and repeated verses of his “In Memoriam,” a 
caterpillar crawled up his desk. The worm was not capaci¬ 
tated to receive a revelation from the great poet. So a materi¬ 
alistic-philosophy, that'makes man only a worm of the dust, de¬ 
stroys the possibility of a revelation. The view, however, which 
Christ presents, that makes man a son of God and only a litttle 
lower than God himself, makes a revelation a natural thing. 

o 

When we conceive of God as a father, it would certainlv be verv 

• * 

unnatural for him not to reveal his will to his children. 

Christ the Religious Teacher of the Race. —The 
greatest writers of the past century recognize Jesus as the true 
religious teacher of the race. Near the close of his life Thom¬ 
as Carlyle used the following language: “The tidings of the 
most, important event ever transacted in this world is the life 
and death of the divine Man in Judaea, at once the symptom 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXV 


and cause of innumerable changes to all people in the world/’ 
John Ruskin has been placed at the very front of the writers of 
the nineteenth century. lie says that his life has been dedi- 
cated, not to “the study of the beautiful in face and flower, in 
landscape and gallery, but to an interpretation of the truth and 
beauty of Jesus Christ.” Among the last words of the critical 
Matthew Arnold are the following: “Christ came to reveal what 
righteousness really is. For nothing will do except righteous¬ 
ness; and no other conception of righteousness will do except 
Christ’s conception of it—his method and secret.” Shake¬ 
speare, the greatest intellect, in many respects, ever known, does, 
in passage after passage, eulogize Jesus Christ as the religious 
leader and teacher of the race. 

Jesus was noted for the simplicity of his style. He had 
not a style, but the style. History tells us of a Spartan trav¬ 
eler who could spend only one day in Athens. This traveler 
went to Phidias, the great artist, and requested him to explain 
the secret of his art. Phidias told him that one dav was not 

tj 

long enough for him to explain his system of sculpture, but that 
it was long enough for him to study a single statue that embod- 
ied the beautiful. So the great artist unveiled the statue of 
• Minerva, and the Spartan spent the day in studying in it the 
principles of beauty. While Jesus knew that a lifetime was 
not long enough for man to fully understand the philosophy 
of religion, he could understand the Fatherhood of God and 
the universal brotherhood of man. So Jesus presents a beau¬ 
tiful parable that teaches the Fatherhood of God, and conse¬ 
quently the brotherhood of man. Charles Dickens, the great¬ 
est master of the pathetic style of the past century, on being 
asked the name of the most pathetic story in literature, at once 
answered: “The story of the prodigal son.” Thomas F. Mar¬ 
shall, one of Kentucky’s greatest orators, asked the noted Dr. 
Breekenridge, of Kentucky, to preach in parables as Jesus did. 
The great preacher promised that he would try to do so the 
next Sunday. Mr. Marshall went to hear the sermon in para¬ 
bles, but Dr. Breekenridge stated that no man could preach in 
parables as did Jesus. 



XXVI 


INTRODUCTION. 


The Christ was noted for the breadth of his teaching. He 
went far beyond the view that pictures God as fear, vengeance 
and iron fate. While even Moses could say, when on the top 
of the mountain, “I exceedingly fear and quake,” Jesus, when 
on the mount, could say, “Our Father who art in heaven.” 
Jesus was not satisfied in teaching simply the attributes ot 
God, but he taught the very essence of God: God is light, God 
is Spirit, and God is love. Ho other teacher ever taught the 

verv nature of God as did Jesus Christ. Hicodemus certainly 

*/ 

made no mistake when he said to Jesus, “W e know that you are 
a teacher come from God, for no man can do these signs that 
thou doest, except God be with him.” Hot only Hicodemus, 
but all the great Jewish doctors of that day, had to admit that 
the works of Jesus were not the works of an ordinary 'mail. 
They recognized in him a special influence from the unseen 
world. 

The view of Jesus Christ in reference to the kingdom of 
God was revolutionary. Even Hicodemus could not under¬ 
stand it. The Jews, like other nations, looked upon the king¬ 
dom as under the protection of a higher power, but they never 
had a conception of the spiritual kingdom that Jesus came to 
establish. The great adversary offered Jesus the kingdoms of 
this world upon the same condition that other great leaders re¬ 
ceived them. Mohammed afterwards accepted them from the 
great adversary. The spiritual conceptions of the kingdom 
of God, as presented by Jesus, were so high that even the apos¬ 
tles were a long time understanding them. When this world 
reaches the high spiritual conceptions of the Christ, then the 
kingdoms of the world will be conquered, and true Christian 
culture will result in the perfection of humanity. 

In Book Second of this w r ork, the author discusses the great- 

est social and political problems of the age. Tie largely views 

\ 

them from the standpoint of Christian sociology. This is in¬ 
deed a new science. Dr. J. H. W. Stuckenberg was one of the 
first persons in this country to write a book on the subject. 
And as a matter of fact, when he wrote it he was living in Ber- 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXV11 


lin, Germany. My attention was soon attracted to the work, 
as I was then a student, in the East, and I bought a copy. I 
have been much interested in the science from that day to this. 
I can see no good reason whv we should not study Christian 

O %J tf 

society the same as we study the Christian individual. 

Auguste Comte, the French philosopher, first introduced the 
word ^sociology" into literature. He invented the word to rep¬ 
resent what he called social physics. As you know, he designed 
his positive philosophy to supersede all metaphysics and the¬ 
ology. He wanted no God to influence society, but only nat- 
ural law. He, however, was never able to tell whence came 
natural law. The laws of nature are the very thoughts of God. 
We are now grateful to know that. Sociology has largely es¬ 
caped its materialistic environment. Sociology is the science 
of society, and Christian sociology is the Christian science of 
society; i. e., it is the science of society viewed from a Chris- 
tian standpoint. We find a sociology in the Bible, and as 
Christ is the central figure of the Bible, Christian sociology 
comprehends Biblical sociology. I regard Christian sociology 
as one of the most important departments of theology. 

Christian sociology is a very important science at the pres¬ 
ent time; for the tendency of Protestantism has been to an ex- 
treme individualism. Both the church and society have suf- 
fered from this extreme tendency. Individuals have been 
leeches, which have fattened themselves on society. Christian 
sociology is greatly needed to counteract this extreme 1 . There 
is also another extreme that is equally dangerous. It is infidel 
socialism, that has made such rapid progress during the last 
half of the nineteenth century. This theory really denies indi¬ 
vidual freedom, and the individual is not considered as having 
any intrinsic value in himself. He is only regarded as a 
means to an end—an instrument to advance the interest of 
society. While individualism makes society valuable only as 
a boat to carry the passenger, socialism makes society a sea, and 
individuals only waves that rise and fall. Christian sociology 
condemns both these figures; it makes society a body, and in- 


XXVI11 


INTRODUCTION. 


dividuals members of this body. The members are as neces¬ 
sary to the perfection of the body, as the body is essential to 
the health and welfare of the members. Both Christ and Paul 
taught there could be no body without members, and no mem¬ 
bers without the body. 

*/ 


In the study of Christian sociology, we should use the 

Oe/ / 

inductive method. We know something of the great blun- 
ders that have been made in other departments of theology 
by the use of isolated proof-texts. Christ and his apostles have 
been made to support all kinds of fanciful theories. No one 
should consider himself competent to speak or write on Chris¬ 
tian sociology until he has studied carefully every passage in 
the Bible bearing on this subject. He is not prepared to gener¬ 
alize until he has wisely handled the Scriptures according to 
the inductive method. Even after all this has been done, it 
is then best to think at least twice before either speaking or 
writing once. You can readily see the importance of this when 
you consider the character of the Yew Testament itself. The 
savings of Jesus on any subject, like those of Plato, are greatly 
scattered, and it is necessary to bring them together. Besides, 
Jesus often used figurative language, and it requires great care 
to always perceive his meaning. Think of the many fanciful 
theories that have been built upon the parable of the unjust 
steward. Christian sociology is indeed a very interesting sci¬ 
ence ; but those who study it should learn to watch as well as 
pray. 

Christian sociology especially concerns itself with three 
normal forms of society; viz.: the family, the state and the 
church. The state is a development out of the family, and, in 
a sense, the church is a development out of the state. Christ 
did not destroy the law and the prophets, but he did fulfill 
them. lie re-enacted everv commandment of the Decalogue 
except one, but all were placed upon a higher plane. In the 
place of the Jewish Sabbath, he established the Lord’s Day; 
but even the Jewish Sabbath itself lie fulfilled. a There is a 
rest remaining for the people of God.” While, in a sense, 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXIX 


Chiistianity was a development, “first the blade, then the ear, 
and then the full corn in the ear,” still the church was quite 
oiiginal with Jesus. It w^as to be built upon a divine founda¬ 
tion, and be animated by the spirit of the new commandment 


which he himself had given. 


Jesus gives special attention to the family as one of the 
normal forms of society. He teaches the importance of a higher 
morality and spirituality on the subject than had ever been 
known before. The overthrow of the ancient familv institu- 
tions among the Romans was rapidly undermining Roman civ¬ 
ilization. The Jews were not so bad, but their loose ideas con¬ 
cerning divorce were rapidly rendering void the ethical influ¬ 
ence of Judaism. The liberal school of Hillel had become a 
very great offender on this question, and a man could even 
obtain a divorce in case he found another woman he liked better 
than his wife. Well could Jesus charge upon the Jewish teach¬ 
ers that they had made void the word of God bv their traditions. 


He referred them back to the primal law of marriage, when 
God made one female for one man, and declared that the twain 
should be one flesh. Hot even father or mother had the right 
to stand in the' way of a proper marital union. If necessary, 
man was to give up even father and mother, and cleave to his 
Avife. In opposition to the traditional view of divorce, he would 
allow divorce on no' other ground than adultery, which crime in 
itself severed the marriage bond. Jesus was very specific in 
his teachings in reference to the family, and the principal cause 
of this Avas doubtless the fact that the family stands at the foun¬ 
dation of all true civilization. It is really a social microcosm, 
and its purity and perpetuity are essential to the progress of 
civilization. Without the Christian family, Ave Avould certainly 
be without the Christian state and the Christian church. 

On its physical side, Jesus regards marriage, like other 
physical social elements, as belonging simply to the present age. 
The much married Avoman of the Sadducees’ puzzle is upon 
this principle easily solved. The levirate law will not apply to 
the future Avorld. Avhere all are as the angels of God. As the 

y O 


XXX 


INTRODUCTION. 


physical and transient in the kingdom of God will ultimately 
give way to the spiritual and permanent, so, in the family, the 
spiritual union which must have accompanied the physical, will 
alone survive, and the love and union of husband and wife will 
lie transmuted into the love and union of children of a common 
Father. They will lie united in the great spiritual family of 
the redeemed. 

Jesus nowhere gives any systematic teaching in reference to 
politics. His attitude towards the state can only be gathered 
from his life and a few scattered statements. His statement, 
‘‘Render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar,” certainly im¬ 
plies a recognition of civil government. Jesus and his apostles 
fully taught that the state was a God-ordained institution, and 
that all citizens should render unto it that obedience essential 
to the welfare of society. Jesus did not teach any particular 
form of government, but that form would be in the greatest 
harmony with his teachings which tended to bring about that 
ideal social condition, characteristic of the kingdom, which lie 
preached. All the monarchy he taught was the fatherly mon¬ 
archy of God, and obedience of all men as sons of God. Societv 
can never reach the Christian ideal until the kingdoms of this 
world become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ. 

The word “kingdom” is probably used at times in a more 
comprehensive sense than the word “church,” but frequently, 
at least, they are interchangeable terms. This is certainly the 
case in the sixteenth chapter of Matthew. The purpose of the 
church, as well as the kingdom, was to lift society to that high 
ideal which he had presented to his disciples. Tn the church, 
there was to be no distinction between rich and poor, bond or 
free; all were to be one in Christ, Jesus was neither an indi¬ 
vidualist nor a socialist, in the modern use of the terms. He 

was a preacher of righteousness. Lie did not commend Lazarus 

% 

because lie was poor, but because he was a righteous man in spite 
of his poverty. He did not condemn Hives because he possessed 
property, but because he was a selfish and foolish individualist. 
He had not the wisdom of the unjust steward, who knew how co 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXM 


provide for the future. Dives might have made a friend of 
Lazarus, and at last have been received by him into everlasting 
habitations. The reason why there was such a gulf between 
them in the future world was the fact that Dives made the gulf 
in the present world. Jesus clearly taught that we are only 
stewards of God in this world, and in the future world we will 
have to account for the wav we have used our Lord’s money. 
I heard a Philadelphia preacher at the University of Texas 
say that in this age it is a disgrace to be poor. If he used the 
word “poor” in the sense of pauper, there is doubtless much 
truth in what he said. It may be even a greater disgrace to be 
rich. Mr. Carnegie has said that the time will come when it 
will be a disgrace to die a millionaire. He doubtless meant 
that it is a disgrace not to make a wise use of the property a 
man may have acquired. 

It is certainly to be regretted that modern socialism has 
been so much under the influence of infidel leaders; for while 
it has gone to great extremes, it certainly has some important 
truths for society. It seems in some quarters to be coming 
more under Christian influence. The present attack of the 
Homan Catholic Church upon it may cause it to defend itself 
against infidelity. It seems that under the direction of the 
Pope the Roman Church has organized a crusade against social¬ 
ism. Bishop Quigley, of Buffalo, N. Y., has issued a manifesto 
against it. He uses the following strong language: “As a 
political party, Social Democracy is a recent importation from 
Continental Europe. Here, as there, its avowed object is the 
creation of a new order of things totally destructive to the ex¬ 
isting social, political and economical conditions under which 
we live. The attainment of this new order of things is to be 
effected by political agitation in the main, but revolutionary 
and violent methods are freely urged by its leading advocates 
as soon as the masses shall be sufficiently organized to cope with 
the power of capital and class. 

“Everywhere this movement is characterized by unbelief, 
hostility to religion, and, above all, uneompromised and bitter 


XXX11 


INTRODUCTION. 


hatred / and denunciation of the Catholic Church. Its official 
programs, the platforms of its party conventions, the public 
utterances of its leading advocates, its newspaper organs and 
periodicals, breathe hatred and threats against revealed relig¬ 
ion, its doctrines and institutions.” 

Again the bishop says: “Social Democracy denies the exist¬ 
ence of God, the immortality of the soul, eternal punishment, 
the right of private ownership, the rightful existence of our 
social organization, and the independence of the church as a 
society complete in itself and founded by God. Therefore no 
Catholic can become a Social Democrat. Therefore no Catho¬ 
lic can become a member of a Social Democratic organization, 
or subscribe for or in any way contribute to the support of a 
Social Democratic newspaper organ.” 

The Worker, the Yew York organ of the Social Democratic 
party, thus replies to the bishop: “The bishop’s charge is a 
sweeping one. We now challenge him, as bishop or an honest 
man, to prove, not the whole, but one-hundredth part of what 
he has alleged. He can not do it, for it is not true. Our na¬ 
tional party platform is printed in this paper; let readers 
search there for hatred, denunciation and threats against the 
Catholic Church or anv other. We have, in our ranks, not onlv 
men holding to the beliefs of Protestant churches, but men be¬ 
longing to the same communion with Bishop Quigley and wear¬ 
ing the same cloth of priesthood. In the Socialist movement 
we ask no man his creed. We demand only his faithful adher¬ 
ence to the working class in its battles with the forces of 
capitalism.” 

Again, the editor of the Worker says: “Bishop Quigley, let 
us advise vou to reconsider your action. Your attack is an 

•/ V 

unprovoked one, for the Socialist party makes no attack upon 
vou or your church or your beliefs. But if vou persist in the 
attack, let us tell vou there is no organization on earth that can 
fight as we can. Bismarck has measured strength with us, and 
failed. Russian czars and French dictators have tried to crush 
our movement, and they have failed. You will not succeed.” 


INTRODUCTION. XXxili 

This shows that the Social Democratic movement has not 
been fully understood. That its leaders in the past have too 
frequently been infidels, there can he no question; but the move¬ 
ment itself is not necessarily infidel. Its purpose is evidently 
to benefit the people, and if it can come under the leadership 
of Christian men, it may become a powerful force in the in¬ 
terest of civilization. While the Social Democracv has gone to 
extremes, its opponents have gone to fully as great extremes, 
and it may yet prove itself to be a providential movement in 
the interest of human itv. Students of Christian sociology 
should do all they can to guide the Social Democracy in the 
right path. We should all work for the general good of man¬ 
kind. 

In Book Third, the author discusses the golden mean phi¬ 
losophy in its relation to the solution of the greatest problems, 
lie fully believes that all the erroneous systems in science, phi¬ 
losophy and religion have been the result of pushing partial 
truths into extremes. Both realism and idealism contain truth, 
but one has been pushed into materialism and the other into 
rationalism. The golden mean philosophy harmonizes the two. 
We find the same extreme positions fully as visible in the his¬ 
tory of religion as in the history of science and philo-sophy. In 
fact, wliat. a man’s philosophy is, that his religion will be. If 
you find a man materialistic in philosophy, you will find him 
materialistic in religion; and if you find him pantheistic in 
philosophy, you will find him rationalistic in religion. What 
is now known as the higher criticism in religion has long since 
been discussed in philosophy. 

We certainly need the golden mean philosophy in discuss¬ 
ing the problems connected with the higher criticism. We 
should at the very beginning be careful in the use of terms, arid 
not confound the higher criticism with destructive criticism. 
Prof. J. W. McGarvey truly says: “Strictly defined, higher 
criticism is the art of ascertaining the authorship, date, credi- 
bility and literarv characteristics of written documents. It is 
a legitimate art, and it has lieen employed by Biblical scholars 


XXXIV 


INTRODUCTION. 


ever since the need of such investigations began to be realized.” 
This definition should be kept in mind, for I frequently see in 
some of our most learned periodicals the higher criticism con¬ 
founded with the destructive criticism. It is greatly to be 
regretted that many who in the past have only been considered 
higher critics, are rapidly becoming very destructive. This is 
manifestly true of Prof. T. K. Cheyne. The following lan¬ 
guage in the Nineteenth Century and After is certainly very 
skeptical: “Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, then, are lunar heroes. 
In the case of Abraham this is, according to Winckler, doubly 
certain. His father Terali comes from Ur of Chaldea, the city 
of the South Babylonian Moon worship (Uannar), but in order 
to reach Canaan, he must halt at Harran, which is the second 
great center of lunar worship in the region of the Euphratian 
civilization.” 

Again the learned professor says: “And how comes Sarah 
to be at once Abraham’s sister and his wife? Because Sarah, 
being the counterpart of Istar, has a double role. She is the 
daughter of the Moon-god, and therefore Abraham's sister; she 
is the wife of Tammuz, and therefore Abraham’s wife. For 
Abraham, too, according to Winckler, has a double role; he is 
the son of the Moon-god, but he is also the heroic reflection of 
Tammuz. Of Isaac little is recorded; he dwells at Beersheiba, 
the well of the Seven-god; that is, the Moon-god. Jacob, how¬ 
ever, is much more definitely described. His father-in-law 
Laban reminds us, by his verv name, of Lebena, the moon, and 
Laban’s two daughters, Leah and Rachel, represent respectively 
the new moon and the full moon. Dinah, Leah's daughter, rep¬ 
resents Istar, the daughter of the Moon-god, and with her six 
brothers makes up the number of the days of the week, one of 
which in fact (Dies Veneris, Friday) has a female deity.” 

Professor Cheyne thinks that the key to the character of 
Joseph is found in Gen. xxxvii. 10, where he dreams that the 
sun, moon, and the eleven stars did homage to him. The pro^ 
fessor further says: “In the original story it was the Moon-god 
(Jacob), with his children, who bowed down before the Sun- 


INTRODUCTION. 


XXXV 


god (Joseph), his sou. The rest of the story of Joseph now 
becomes clear. The lunar heroes, Abraham and Jacob, fetched 
their spouses from the land of the Moon-worship; the solar 
hero Joseph goes to Egypt, the land of Sun-worship, to obtain 
for his wife the daughter of a priest of Heliopolis. But, like 
Abraham, Joseph also represents Tanrmuz, the Sun-god of 
sprirfgtide, who dies and passes into the underworld, whither 
Istar descends to bring him hack to earth. This is why he Is 
cast into the pit, and again raised out of it. Hence another 
reason for Joseph’s going into Egypt, for Egypt represents the 
southern region of the sky, in which the sun stands in the win- 
ter when Tammuz is dead. That the tribes of Israel (neces¬ 
sarily twelve, because of the signs of the zodiac), together with 
their ancestors, are connected with an astral myth, is not a new 
idea, but it has been worked out by Stucken and Winckler with 
greater fullness of knowledge than by any previous writer. Ct 
is, of course, not stated that the early legends are historically 
worthless; wisely used, even the early legends can he made to 
furnish historical material, both directly and indirectly.” 

It can readily be seen by students of philosophy that the 
methods of Stucken and Winckler are those of the Left Wing 
of the Hegelian philosophy. Strauss and others applied the 
same methods to the New Testament and failed; and the de¬ 
structive critics of the Old Testament will certainly make even 
as great a failure. Their methods would not only destroy the 
history contained in the Bible, but all other ancient history and 
even much modern history. The student would soon begin to 
inquire if Hannibal, Csrsar and Alexander had any real exist¬ 
ence. Destructive criticism is skepticism; for if it succeeds in 
destroying the Old Testament, it will by precisely the same- 
methods destroy the Xew. As Neander and others effectively 
answered the arguments of Strauss and his school in their de¬ 
structive criticism on the New Testament, so there are others 
who will as effectively answer the destructive critics of the Old 
Testament. It is said that when Neander read the statement 
of De Wette that the resurrection of Christ could no more be 


XXXVI 


INTRODUCTION. 


denied upon historical evidence than the assassination of Julius 
Caesar, the great historian burst into tears. It is equally true 
that upon historical evidence the lives of the patriarchs can no 
more be denied than can the lives of the Roman emperors, it 
seems that the purpose of the destructive critics of both the 
Old and New Testaments is to eliminate the supernatural. 
This they can not do, for it would destroy all revelation. Hegel 
claims that the Christ is the <>oal of all ancient history and the 
point of departure for all modern. The resurrection of the 
Christ is the supreme fact of the gospel, and the fact upon 
which the apostles dwelt. The man who denies this fact can 
no longer in consistency be called a Christian. 


Book I 


THE GREATEST SCIENTIFIC AND PHILOSOPHICAL 

PROBLEMS OF THE AGE. 


CHAPTER I. 

The Problem of Theism. 

• 

Those who deny the personality of God are weak in their 
belief of the personality of man. In all the pantheistic relig¬ 
ions of the East, men are very indistinct in the perception of 
their own personality. Why is this? I answer, it is because 
man arrives at a belief in the personality of God very much as 
he arrives at a belief in his own personality. Self-conscious¬ 
ness, unperverted, guarantees a belief in man’s personality, and 
man’s religious nature, unperverted, guarantees a belief in a 
Supreme Being. The great German psychologist Lotze uses 
the word ahnung, which is nearly the same as our word presage , 
for man’s primitive sense of a Supreme Being. That man has 
such an apprehension of God is evident from the fact that his 
belief in the existence of God does not always depend upon 
proof. One special fault I find with works on Theism is the 
fact that nearly all of them that I have read place special em¬ 
phasis upon some particular argument, and ignore all the rest. 
Even Sir William Hamilton made this mistake. I will pre^ 
sent here ten proofs of Theism, which, taken together, are to 
my mind perfectly conclusive. 

Proof I. Intuition. I think that Professor Calderwood, in 
his excellent work on “The Philosophy of the Infinite,” places 
too much stress upon this argument. In fact, he seems to ignore 
all other arguments. Dr. Hodge, in his “Systematic Theology,” 
takes the position that the idea of God is innate. He does not, 
however, go so far as Professor Calderwood, and ignore all other 
proofs. I do not think that man has an intuition of God in the 



2 


MACROCOSMUS. 


sense that he has of space and time. Sir Isaac Newton claimed 
that space and time are attributes' of God. If that, be true, 
then God exists, for space and time of necessity exist. We 
must not confound intuition and instinct. It is certainly 
true that man instinctively looks Godward, and those who 
use intuition in that sense certainly have a legitimate argu¬ 
ment. 

II. The Ontological Proof. The existence of God is in¬ 
volved in the idea of him. Dr. Me Cosh, in his “Intuitions of 
the Mind,” places a good deal of stress upon this argument. 
Man naturally attaches to the idea of an infinite and perfect 
being the very image of God. From the fact that man has in 
his mind the idea of the infinite, Descartes reasoned that God 
must have been the author of it. This is reallv a valuable 

V 

argument from effect to cause. 

III. The Cosmological Proof. Everything in this world 
is finite, and did not have its origin in itself. AVe can trace 
e,fleets back to causes, which also become effects.. If there is no 
causative being, who exists without being caused, then the chain 
would be endless, and causation would be a mere phantom. 
Julius Muller, the great German theologian, shows quite con¬ 
clusively that causa sui implies personality. If this be true, 
then the universe is an effect, and a supreme personality is its 
author. 

It is very evident that the world could not have made itself. 
Some so-called philosophers reason very much as Topsy did. 
They say the world has simply grown, has been developed. 
Suppose that is true, would not an advancing world need an 
author as well as one that stands still ( If the world has simply 
unfolded itself out of chaos, it would, then, certainly demand 
an infinite cause. 

Everything in this world is dependent. Gravitation holds 
the mineral kingdom in its place, and it is moved by a force not 
itself. The vegetable kingdom depends upon the mineral for i U 
life. The animal depends upon the vegetable. Even the earth 
depends upon the sun, and, so far as we know, the whole system 
of nature is dependent, Man himself is a dependent being. A 


THE PROBLEM OF THEISM. 


3 


dependent being implies an independent one. We may safely 
conclude, then, that man’s author is an independent being. 

IV. The Geological Proof. Geology fu rnishes some strik¬ 
ing proofs of the existence of a Supreme Being. The history 
of this earth shows crisis as well as development. There was 
a time of awful convulsions, when the solid rocks rolled in liquid 
fire. At one time, the atmosphere, a hundred miles high, was 
filled with gases that no animal could breathe. There was a time 
when gigantic animals, now extinct, were monarchs of this 
world, and devoured its great vegetation. There is after this a 
great ice period, and animals, frozen in the ice, are preserved to 
the present time. After all this the earth is fitted up for the 
abode of man. We must look beyond development to the Infinite 
Creator as a sufficient guide to have brought the earth through 
all its dangers. 

If the theory of development be true, inert matter could not 
have produced such wonderful phenomena. In fact, all devel¬ 
opment implies a guiding will beyond phenomena. The forces 
of nature certainly can not account for their own origin. If 
there is a law of evolution, that is the guiding star in all 
progress, that law can not account for its own origin. It points 
back to a Supreme Lawgiver, who is far above the mutability 
of phenomena. 

Y. The Astronomical Proof. “The heavens declare the glorv 

O t/ 

of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork” (Ps- 
xix. 1). 

1. r Ihe heavens declare the glory of God in their unity. The 
heavens above are spheres, very much like our earth. All have 
orbitual motions, and probably also axial motions. All appear 
to be warmed and lighted by the same element, and are governed 
bv the same law of gravitation. Observe our solar system, and 
vou find unity in variety. One member of the system is one 
hundred miles in diameter, and another nearly one hundred 
thousand. Some have moons, others have none; some have at¬ 
mospheres, others have none. Saturn has three equatorial rings, 
and eight moons; no other planet has so many. TTeptune’s 
vear is equal to one hundred and sixty-five of ours. Saturn s day 


4 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


is about one-half of our day. While there is infinite variety 
in the solar system, we also find perfect unity. All have a com¬ 
mon center, and around the sun the different planets and satel¬ 
lites go. Night after night they declare God’s glory. In the 
solar system we have unity of matter and unity of law, and 
these declare the unity of God. 

We find the same unity in variety when we pass to the fixed 
stars. These fixed stars are great central suns, very much like 
our sun. They differ greatly in size, and even the light emit¬ 
ted from them has different colors. Some of the systems 
appear to be lighted with emerald, and others with many colors. 
Of course these great suns differ in size. Take Sirius, the 
brightest star in the heaven, and it is almost dazzling to tha 
naked eye. Around one great center the universe appears to 
move, and we are probably safe in calling this center the very 
throne of God itself. 

2. The heavens declare the on mi pot cnee of God. The power 
of the almighty architect is certainly displayed to all who fully 
comprehend the structure of the heavens. Such might not be 
the case to a superficial observer. Contemplate for a short time 
the ponderous orbs, and you will understand what I mean. Our 
earth is one of the smallest, and it is a globe eight thousand 
miles in diameter. Think of this ponderous body hurled into 
space and in constant motion. This gives us some conception 
of omnipotence. But what is our earth in comparison with 
the great universe of God ? It is God’s almighty arm that has 
projected these stupendous orbs into space, and impressed upon 
them their wonderful velocity. It is useless to talk about the 
laws of motion and attraction. These are but the modes in 
which God exercises his power, and they can not, in any sense, 
bo the power itself. 

3. The heavens declare God’s glory in their vastness. The 
vastness of the solar system is almost beyond comprehension. 
The sun itself might l>e called a million-fold world. Then think 
of the other bodies of the great svstem, and vou can indeed 
exclaim, How vast! Then look, some bright night, into space, 
and behold a thousand suns, similarlv attended to our own. The 


THE PROBLEM OF THEISM. 


5 


telescope brings many more to our view. I was never more im¬ 
pressed with the vastness of the heavens than when permitted, 
upon the top of JVlt Hamilton, to look at the heavens through 
the great Lick telescope. God’s glory is certainly declared in 
the vastness of the heavens. 

4. The heavens declare the wisdom of God. It is not so 
easy to understand the wisdom of an architect as his power. 
It is easy to see the evidence of power in a steam-engine, while 
a much better understanding of the engine is essential in order 
to comprehend the wisdom in its construction. While we read¬ 
ily see power in the universe, it requires quite a good compre¬ 
hension of the celestial mechanism in order to understand the 
wisdom displayed in its organization and arrangement. The 
thoughtful astronomer can not otherwise than behold the wisdom 
of God in the organization of the solar system. In the center 
is the controlling orb. The planets vary in distance from this 
center until the most distant one includes in its orbit an area 
whose diameter is five billions of miles. While these orbs 
attract one another, God in his wisdom has so arranged them 
that they move on in their pathways without any conflict. The 
same thing is true of all other systems, as well as the solar 
systeui. Some astronomers recently thought that Biela’s comet 
would strike our earth. When the comet reached the point of 
contact, the earth had passed on and was safe. The wisdom of 
God is fully manifest in the wonderful order and adaptation 
which the astronomer finds everywhere in the shining heavens. 

5. The heavens declare God’s glory in their relationship to 
law. All nature is governed by law, or, better, according to 
law. The laws of Ivepler and of Newton are as operative to-day 
as they were at the time of their discovery. The planets move 
in the same elliptical orbits, in the same times, and with the 
same principles of retardation and acceleration as they did 
thousands of years ago. The stellar system is no less governed 
according to law than the solar system. We find law every¬ 
where, even upon the blazing thrones of the heavens. The most 
distant svstem is as much governed bv the law of gravitation 
as is our solar system. God everywhere governs according to 


6 


MACROCOSMUS. 


law. What we term the laws of nature are simply the uniform 
expression of the will of God. 

VI. The Pliysico-Theologica 1 Proof. The evidence of inteh 
ligent purpose in the constitution of the world proves the per¬ 


sonality, the intelligence and freedom of the First Cause. It 
is an argument that will impress all intelligent persons. Socra¬ 
tes illustrated this argument by a statue, and Paley, two thou¬ 
sand years afterwards, by a watch. All nature can really be 
used as an illustration. Sir Isaac Newton thought the eve a 
cure for atheism. The eye is both telescope and microscope, 
altering its focus to suit the distance of an object The lenses 
of the eye, and the optic nerve behind them, are adapted to 
the waves of light coming from the sun, more than ninety 

millions of miles away. The whole system of nature is cer- 

«/ «/ 

tainly valuable in the argument from design. The following 

%j O O O 


lines, doubtless, contain more truth than poetry: 


God! let the torrents, like a voice of nations, 
Answer; and let the ice-plains echo, God! 

God! sing, ye meadow streams, with gladsome voice; 
Ye pine groves, with your soft and soul-like sound; 
Ye signs and wonders of the elements. 

Utter forth God, and fill the world with praise.” 


It is important to distinguish between order and adaptation 
since the advent of modern evolution theories. In order, we 
have the harmony of nature resulting from the reign of law. 
]n adaptation we have the arrangement of means to special intel¬ 
ligent ends. Both order and adaptation imply design. In the 
perfect conformity of all vertebrate animals to a typical idea is 
a good example of order; the adaptation of the wing for flying 
or the foot for walking well illustrates special adaptation. The 
mind, in the order of nature, can not otherwise than recognize 
the very thought of God. To my mind, adaptation is plainer 
in the works of God than in the works of man. The hand of 
man bears more marks of design than the tools that man makes. 
Some seem to think that the evolution theory destroys the tele- 
ological argument. This theory is not science, but only an 
hypothesis, which may not hereafter be accepted as science. 


THE PROBLEM OF THEISM. 


7 


But if it should hereafter be proved, it would not affect the 
theistic argument, which proceeds from adaptation to design. 
A few rudely formed stones satisfy geologists of the past exist¬ 
ence of mankind in the corresponding epoch. This shows a 
natural belief on the part of mankind that adaptation proves 
design. In fact, evolution has nothing to do with the why, but 
simply the how of phenomena. Even Professor Huxley affirms 
the consistency of evolution with design. These are his words: 
‘‘The teleological and mechanical views of nature are not neces¬ 
sarily mutually exclusive. On the contrary, the more purely a 
machinist the speculator is, the more firmly he affirms pri¬ 
mordial nebular arrangement, of which all the phenomena of 
the universe are consequences ; the more completely is he thereby 
at the mercy of the teleologists, who can always defy him to dis¬ 
prove that this primordial nebular arrangement was not in¬ 
tended to evolve the phenomena of the universe.” 

I want to draw a few evidences of design from anatomy and 
physiology. These have always been very striking to me ever 
since, in my boyhood, I read Paley’s works. The means by 
which food is converted into blood, which blood is so conveved 
through vessels that nutriment is properly appropriated, and 
waste matter thrown away. In this arrangement we have won¬ 
derful adaptation. The heart, which propels the blood to all 
parts of the system, is more wonderful than the great engine 
we saw in Machinery Hall at the Centennial Exposition, which 
moved all the machinery in the hall. Such adaptation cer¬ 
tainly implies intelligent design. All thoughtful persons must 
admire the wonderful skill which planned the human hand. 
When we watch the fingers of the musician flying over the 
kevs, we are impressed with matchless adaptation. Xo more 
perfect mechanical device can anywhere be found. Does it not 
imply intelligent design? One more illustration; viz.: The 
human brain that holds in its mysterious folds the thought that 
advances the highest civilization. The relationship of the brain 
to thought is wonderful. In great mental activity the brain 
receives a larger supply of blood. In fact, the temperature 
so increases that it can be measured by a thermometer applied 


s 


MACROCOSMUS. 


to the scalp. Adaptation found in anatomy and physiology cer¬ 
tainly points very plainly to an intelligent designer. 

VII. The Psychological Proof. As the eye implies the 
existence of light, so the religious instincts of man imply a 

from above. The religious nature of man is as real as the 
physical; and as the physical implies the existence of the 'ma¬ 
terial world, so the spiritual implies the existence of the spir¬ 
itual world. Man knows the existence of mind bv his own 
consciousness; and while he is not directly conscious of God, 
he is conscious of the existence of faculties which cause him to 
reach out for the Infinite. The soul has a conscious dependence 
upon a higher Being, and feels that this world can not fully 
satisfy its wants. 

Man is so constituted that he needs guidance. The history 
of the race, as well as that of the individual, shows that man 
is not a sufficient guide in himself. He must be placed under 
law. There can not bo law without a lawgiver. Therefore, the 
Author of man’s nature is a Lawgiver. But man’s nature not 
only demands law, but it demands moral law, and this implies 
that man’s Creator is a moral Lawgiver . The faculties of the 
human mind are such that they demand an intellectual and 
moral guide to secure their complete development. The God of 
nature and of revelation has given a system by which humanity 
can reach perfection. 

VIII. The Historical Proof. This argument is from 
the belief of mankind, as testified from the facts of history. 
Recent researches in history and ethnology fully justify the 
statement that if a belief in God is not innate, it is certainly 
connate. It is true that some missionaries and travelers who 
were unwilling to believe that man could obtain any knowl¬ 
edge of God except from the Bible, have reported that they 
found tribes entirely destitute of the theistic idea. But a more 
careful knowledge of the language and literature of such tribes 
lias shown that the first reports were erroneous. While the idea 
of some tribes may be crude and grotesque, it. does not destroy 
the fact that mankind universally feel a dependence upon a 
higher being. 



THE PROBLEM OF THEISM. 


9 


Comparative philology has been a great support, to the his 
torical argument in favor of thei divine existence. It is said 
that the Aryan race has always had a tendency tO' polytheism; 
}et we find in all the I n d o- E uropean languages a. tendency to 
monotheism clear back of all polytheistic notions. The word for 
God is really the same in Sanskrit, Greek, Latin and German. 
In the oldest documents of the Aryan race this word is used 
to denote the highest Deity and the Father of gods and men. 
I his tact, to'my mind, is very significant, and it shows that the 
whole Aryan race at one time tended towards a belief in a 
Supreme Being. 

We may account for the theistic idea among the races of men 
in the following ways: (1) God at the beginning gave man a 
revelation of himself. Even John Stuart Mill claimed that if 
there were a God, it was probable that he had revealed himself 
to man. (2) There is a common tendency among men to retain 
and transmit the idea when once presented. (3) Man instinct¬ 
ively depends upon a higher being. 

IX. The Providential Proof. This argument is founded 
upon the evidence of a moral government among men. As the 
spirit influences the body, but is to us unseen, so God in his 
providence governs this world, although he is to us unseen. 

Anv careful student of the world’s advancement can not. fail 

«/ 

to see the providential guidance of God in the progress of 
humanity. The very things which have appeared as ruinous to 
a nation have been the means of its rapid advancement. The 
Civil War in America appeared perfectly ruinous to republi¬ 
can institutions, \ 7 et it was really a means of unifying the coun¬ 
try, and the United States has made more rapid progress since 
than ever before. Even the Southern States are more prosper¬ 
ous than they were before the war. God makes even the wrath 
of man to praise him. How different, indeed, is this view of 
the world from that adopted by the pessimists. Shopenhauer, 
the great, prophet of this school, claims that man is befooled bv 
hope, and dances into the arms of death. He looks upon human 
life and upon man as a failure, and thinks it would have been 
better if man had never been born. Tf all men believed this 


10 


MACROCOSMUS. 


doctrine, it would be an eternal bar to liuman progress. Under 
the benign influence of a faith in the providential government 
of God, the highest ethical systems of the world have been de¬ 
veloped. The reign of atheism in France during the last part 
of the eighteenth century shows that when a nation becomes 
thoroughly atheistic it is prepared for a reign of terror. It 
unchains anarchic forces, and demoralization immediately com¬ 
mences its ruinous work. All persons, then, who believe in the 
progress of civilization must advocate the theistic idea. 

X. The Ethical Proof. This evidence is based upon the 
fact that man has a conscience. I do not think that conscience 
teaches the right, but it is certainly a correct guide in the 
region of the motives. It is that faculty of the mind by which 
one perceives and feels the right or the wrong in the intention 
and the choice. The question which now presents itself to us is. 
Why has man such a guide? We can not discard the intuitive 
principle of causality; and as we And man with such a guide 


in his own bosom, we must conclude that its cause is an intel¬ 
lectual and moral guide. 

Conscience is not only a guide, but it is also a, ruler and a 
judge. It sits in judgment upon our actions, and if we are not, 
obedient to its authority, it lashes us with the intemsest fury. 


The little word ought has made cowards of some of the great¬ 
est conquerors of the world. The existence of this ruler and 
judge in the constitution of man implies a Ruler and Judge over 
tlie affairs of the universe. We find ourselves amenable to a 
law which is not the product of our will, and which is irrevo¬ 
cably imposed upon us, and the violation of which brings upon 
us the greatest misery. This testifies to the existence of a moral 
Lawgiver who has written man’s duty in his inmost nature. 
]\Ian’s moral nature thus connects him with a moral system 
which has been established by the Ultimate Cause of all exist¬ 


ence. In the study of self, man finds a purpose not his own, 
which he knows himself frequently to resist ; but it is felt in his 
nature, and he can not get rid of the idea that he ought, to be. a 
good man. The fact that man has a purpose connected with 
a great, moral system makes him think of a moral purposer as 


THE PROBLEM OE THEISM. 


11 


the Author of his being and that of all other moral beings. We 
feel that there is a. moral government over this world, and that 
we are under obligations to it. In the conflicts between good 
and evil we know that we ought to choose the good and reject 
the evil; and whatever the consequences may be, those who fol¬ 
low conscience will always follow what they believe to be right. 
The eternal ought lifts man far above utilitarianism. He feels 
under obligations to that power, not ourselves, which makes for 
righteousness. 


From the relation of moral law to the happiness of man, 
the philosopher Kant presented an argument in favor of the 
divine existence. He claimed that the moral law, viewed as an 
original and unconditional command, manifested itself within 
man as a categorical imperative. We are under obligations to 
the moral idea,, and really exist for morality and happiness. 
To the moral law we are bound by an imperative that admits 
of no dissent, and to happiness we are bound by certain capac¬ 
ities, desires and adaptations. The moral law compels us to 
seek the happiness of others as well as our own, and we feel 
that we are capable of gaining for ourselves and for others the 
happiness for which nature has adapted men. We are compelled, 
therefore, by an act of the practical reason, to assume the exist¬ 
ence of a moral Author and Governor of the universe and future 
state, in order to reconcile and complete those, elements which 
appear in human nature. 

A powerful argument for the Divine Existence can be built 
upon the instincts of conscience. When we study the instincts 
of the lower animals (for example, those of the bee, ant and 
beaver), we find them working through a wonderful agency 
towards a distinct purpose. If we are true to science, we will 
not fail to find in the instincts of conscience that which causes 
man to work as if the approval of God was the chief end of 
life. The instincts of conscience seem, then, to point to God 
as a person; for we care nothing about pleasing that which 
is blind and destitute of personality. But we feel our depend¬ 
ence upon God, and are anxious to obey bis commandments. 
We instinctively feel that by doing right we are getting closer 


MACKOCOS M US. 


12 


and closer to him, and that. we can become so 'much assimilated 
to his character that we will ultimately see him as he is. 

1 will not have space here to present the Biblical argument 
in favor of the Divine Existence. 1, however, consider it the 
most convincing argument of all. The Bible assumes the Divine 
Existence, and addresses man as the offspring of God. If the 
Bible contains a revelation from God, which its types, miracles 
and prophecies certainly show, then the question of the Divine 
Existence is settled. There is no reasonable explanation of the 
mission of the Christ except upon the supposition that G(xl was 
his Father. God’s greatest revelation to man was through 
the Christ ; and Jesus, the Christ, fully emphasized the unity, 
the spirituality, and the moral perfection of God. 


CHAPTER II. 

The Problem oe Creation. 


INTRODUCTION. 

Astronomy gives us the probable origin of the universe. 
Then Geology, so far as this earth is concerned, comes in to 
explain the phenomena. As we are especially concerned with 
these sciences in the problem of creation, I want to call some 
attention to them in this Introduction. 

These sciences take man beyond the limits of his present 
mortal existence. While they disclose to us our smallness com¬ 
pared with the beyond, at the same time the fact that we are 
permitted to investigate the beyond, is a foundation of hope 
that we have a relationship to worlds beyond this sublunary 
sphere. These seem to be the only physical sciences that 
really do point us beyond this present world. The other sci¬ 
ences deal almost exclusively with the laws of nature here, 
and put in our hands the means of greatly increasing our powers 
over the material world. Some of the other sciences are greatly 
dependent upon Astronomy and Geology; for example, Geogra¬ 
phy and Navigation borrow much from Astronomy. While 
Astronomy and Geology have many points of likeness, in other 
respects they are very dissimilar. 

1. While Astronomy is the oldest of the sciences, Geology is 
almost the youngest. The early Egyptians and Chaldeans cul¬ 
tivated Astronomy, and they really made great progress for 
their times. They mapped out distinctly the constellations, 
which we are contented still to adopt. They also 1 understood 
the signs of the Zodiac. We thus see that Astronomy was 
born several thousand years before its sister Geology. In. fact, 
Geology did not. exist until the last quarter of the eighteenth 
century. 

2. Geology points to the past, while Astronomy belongs 
to the present and the future. Geology goes back to prehistoric 
times, and untombs the Ichthyosaurus, the Pterodactyl and the 


14 


MACROCOSM US. 


Mastodon. It astonishes us with the remains of former <-rea- 
tions. Astronomy exists in the present, and will continue to 
exist in the future. The sun, around which roll the planets, 
is the center and life of our system. This order will continue 
until the Creator, at the second coining of Christ, revolution¬ 
izes the system. In fact., the greatest astronomers of the age 
claim that the solar system is running down, and the time must 
come when there will he a great catastrophe. 

3. Astronomy and Geology differ in the nature of their 
proofs. Astronomy has largely mathematical evidence. This, 
of course, is demonstrative. It also employs observation, com¬ 
parison, and deduces from facts uniform laws of nature and 
fixed relations of cause and effect. While this is not equal to 
mathematical evidence, it may almost amount to certainty. The 
work of Professor Stokes and others in the application of the 
spectroscope to astronomical purposes, introduces, to some ex 
tent, the experimental method into astronomical studies. 

Geology rests almost entirely upon the evidence of facts; 
and these facts are not so numerous nor so well ascertained a? 
the one relating to Astronomy. They have to he obtained from 
relics of former conditions of our earth, and they are much 
scattered and unconnected. The consequence is that many hastv 
theories in Geology have had to be abandoned. The imperfec¬ 
tions of the science in reference to chronology should not. Ik 1 
overlooked. It has no means of calculating the duration of time 
in the successive epochs of the earth’s surface. This fact is 
valuable in the study of the relation of Geology to the Mosaic 
Cosmogony. 

SECTION I.-ASTRONOMY AND GENESIS. 


There are four hypotheses in reference to the origin of the 
universe: (1) It has been claimed by some that the universe 
is eternal; that it passes through cycles of change, something 
like the revolutions of the planets upon their orbits. (2) This 
hypothesis also demands the eternity of matter, and it attrib¬ 
utes the laws of the universe to chance. It teaches the blindest 
fatalism. (3) Agnostic evolution does not. differ greatly from 

O *y 

the preceding hypothesis; but it is more in harmony with law 


THE PROBLEM OF CREATION. 


15 


iu its relationship to the unknowable. (4) God created the 
heavens and the earth, ihis does not exclude a proper evolu¬ 
tion. 

The first two hypotheses are plainly contradicted by the rev¬ 
elations of modern science. The greatest scientific writers in 
the world now claim that the material universe had a begin- 
ning, and that it will alsoi have an end. 1STeither vegetable 
nor animal life is eternal. Man did not alwavs live on this 

t/ 

earth. Astronomy carries us far beyond the existence of life. 
Ihe gaseous state to* which it points us was not the permanent 
state, for matter did not continue in that, state. It is very evi¬ 
dent that, it had a beginning. Why may not the Unknown of 
Herbert Spencer, from which all things have come, be the God 
who has revealed himself in the Bible? Science and religion 
look at the same things from different, standpoints, and they 
should always be friends. Take, for example, Astronomy. In 
the shining heavens the astronomer observes matter and force; 
and really studies the heavens from the standpoint of what we 
now call celestial physics. The religious observer beholds the 
immensity, omnipotence and wisdom of God. Instead of these 
different aspects of the same phenomena being opposed to each 
other, they are equally essential t,o* make up the whole truth 
in reference to the same facts. Science without religion is 
blank materialism; and religion without science is supersti¬ 
tion. Religion and science are not only logically related, but 
they are also historically related. Both go back to the begin¬ 
ning when Jehovah created the heavens and the earth. 

Many foolish objections have been urged by religious teach¬ 
ers to the nebular hypothesis of ITerschel and Laplace, Of 
course, it is only an hypothesis, and there are some scientific 
objections to it. So far as religion is concerned, there is cer¬ 
tainly nothing in it antipodal. It is a beautiful hypothesis, 
placing the solar system under a single law, thus pointing to 
the unity of nature and the unity of the Creator. This hypothe¬ 
sis claims that the sun was at one time a nebulous globe, the 
diameter of which comprehended within its limits the orbits of 
all the planets. The matter of which the solar system is now 


16 


MACROCOSMUS. 


composed, at that time was a part of the sun. Contraction 
increased the velocity of this great, body until centrifugal force 
overcame gravity, and a vast ring is thrown oil, which revolves 
upon its axis as does the parent body. Thus the planets 
and satellites of the solar system were formed. This inter¬ 
esting hypothesis all works well after matter was once set. in 
motion and placed under law; but we naturally ask, Who set 
inert matter in motion and placed it under law ? We are thus 
forced back to the great First Cause of all existence. This bar- 
monizes with the Bible, that God at the beginning created the 
heavens and the earth. Genesis and Astronomy are thus in per¬ 
fect harmony. Genesis as well as Astronomy teaches that, the 
heavens were created before the earth. This was in the begin¬ 
ning. The definite article is not in the original; so Genesis only 
teaches that God in the beginning created the heavens and the 
earth. It makes no difference how far science may go back, 
Genesis goes back equally as far. The Bible as well as science 
teaches that the seen universe came from the unseen. The 
wasteness and emptiness of Gen. i. 1 certainly harmonizes with 
the nebular hypothesis. This primitive condition of matter 
was before sun, planet or blazing star. “And the earth was 
waste and void.” 

Hebrew scholars are quite well agreed that bara in Gen. i. 1 
denotes primary creation, especially when it is in the Kal con¬ 
jugation. Gesenius thus speaks: “The use of this verb in Kal 
(the conjugation here employed) is entirely different from its 
primary signification (to cut, to shape, to fashion), and it is 
used rather of the new production of a. thing than of the shap¬ 
ing or elaboration of existing material.” Delitzsch says: “The 
word bam, in its etymology, does not exclude a previous ma¬ 
terial. Tt has, as the use of Biel shows, the fundamental idea 
of cutting or hewing. But, a.s in other languages words which 
define creation by God have the same etymological idea at their 
root, so barn lias acquired the idiomatic meaning of a divine 
creating, which, whether in the kingdom of nature, or of history, 
or of the spirit, calls into being that which hitherto had no 
existence.” 


THE PROBLEM OE CREATION. 


IT 


. “And God said, Let there be light; and there was light.” 
When this sublime declaration was made, there was no sun, 
planets or stars. Could a'mere man, with the views of creation 
entertained by the wise in the days of Moses, have made such 
a declaration ( This statement is in perfect harmony with the 
nebular hypothesis, which probably explains the origin of the 
universe. It was because God commanded, that light w;as. It 
was necessary for God to create the medium through which light 
is transmitted, or the sun could not have given us light. “God 
called the light Bay, and the darkness lie called Night.” This 
sublime language shows a separation between light and dark¬ 
ness, but the word day denotes an indefinite period, and not 
simply twenty-four hours. We find both the word day and the 
word vear thus used by the ancients. 


In the second and third periods of time the work of crea¬ 
tion continues to progress; so that at the close of the third 
period the planetary worlds, including our earth, are definitely 
organized. The word firmament should be translated expanse, 
and then all the trouble connected with that word is settled. 

On the fourth day, or great period of creation, the mist is 
driven away, and the sun, moon and stars become visible. The 
order of creation thus far given by Moses is in perfect harmony 
with science. The earth, one of the smallest of the planets, 
was thrown from the sun’s equator long after the outer plan¬ 
ets, and at a time when the sun’s matter had been more con¬ 
densed. The smallness of the earth would cause it to lose its 
caloric with great rapidity, so it would become a fit place for 
vegetable life long before the sun would lose its nebulosity. 
This it would do before its atmosphere would become sufficiently 
translucent for the sun, moon and stars to be seen. While day 
and night, before this, had been severed, they had not become 
so separated as they were on the fourth day. 

While we believe that the nebular hypothesis is probably 
true, it should not be forgotten that it is only an hypothesis. 
We find in the material world more than sixty elementary sub¬ 
stances, with their affinities, attractions and repulsions. The 
spectroscope, which may reveal even more than the telescope,. 


18 


MACROCOSMUS. 


shows these same substances in the distant stars. Whence came 
all these elements ? Something more than star dust is required 
to explain them. If they were originally placed in the star 
dust, then the Creator placed them there, and lie must have su¬ 
perintended their development, for evolution implies a Supreme 
Being back of it. Dead matter can not account for the produc¬ 
tion of the universe. Nature, intelligently understood, as well 
as the Bible, truly declares the glory of God. 

SECTION II.-GEOLOGY AND THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY. 

1. The Geological Record. I have heard Dana and Guyot 
in their classrooms; and they not only convinced me that Geol¬ 
ogy and Genesis are in harmony, but they made mo feel that 
Geology is almost divine. 

The materials of the earth are so arranged that you can read 
its history almost as you do the pages of a printed book. One 
leaf is above another, as one page follows another, written, en¬ 
graved and illustrated. There are six geological ages, as there 
are six davs in Genesis; and those who study carefully the two 
records., will be astonished in contemplating such a wonderful 
harmonv. Such harmony does not exist between science and 

L 

other ancient records. 

The first age in Geology is called the Azoic Agej The word 
means without life, but life certainly extended further back 
than many geologists are disposed to think. Dr. J. W. Daw¬ 
son, of Montreal, Canada, discovered life as far back as the 
Laurentian period. Dr. Carpenter, of London, carefully exam¬ 
ined this species under the microscope, and confirmed the dis¬ 
covery of Dr. Dav r son. When I visited Montreal, one of the 
first places I was anxious to see was the lecture-room of Dr. 
Dawson at McGill University. This great man has done much 
to advance the cause of both science and religion. The first 
time T ever looked upon iho Laurentian hills, I w’as deeply 
impressed with the majestic intelligence of the Architect of 
this earth. How uncertain is the language of man, who calls 
the Western Continent the new' world, when in reality it con¬ 
tains the first land raised from the bottom of the. deep! ITow 


THE PROBLEM OF CREATION. 


19 


long the Azoic Age continued we do not know, and it is prob- 
ble we never will. 

Just above the Azoic Age comes the Silurian Age. It is 
the first story ol the building above the foundation. Of old, 
God laid of granite the foundation of the earth, and in the 
Silurian Age lie commenced building upon the granite; and 
we thus have the second page in the world’s history. The rocks 
of this period are mostly slates, limestones and sandstones, and 
they are not thought to be less than thirty thousand feet in 
thickness. It is quite remarkable that of the many species 
that lived and died during that period, not even one of those 
that now swim the sea, or creep upon the land, can be identi¬ 
fied with the species of the Silurian Age. 

The next page in the wonderful book is the Divonian Age. 
In this age was formed the old red sandstone, which, in the 
State of Xew York, is fourteen thousand feet in thickness. 
This was the age of fishes, and although there are thousands 
of species, we can safely say that but few, if any, can be iden¬ 
tified with the species of the preceding period. This does not 
at all harmonize with the doctrine of transmutation of species. 
Another difficulty for that theory, just here, is the fact that 
the ganoids, or reptilian fishes, which are among the highest 
grade, were the earliest of fishes. 

We turn another leaf, and come to the great Carboniferous 
Age. Then was deposited the coal which now warms and lights 
our houses. Many times have I, in the city of Scranton, Pa., 
looked at the bright anthracite coal fires, and thought of the 
•Great Designer, who formed the coal for man long before his 
advent upon this planet. 

The next formation above the Carboniferous is called the 
Reptilian Age, because during this period the reptiles were 
as numerous as the plants had been during the coal period. 
There is quite a chasm here, which evolution alone can not 
bridge. There are no reptiles at the present time to be com¬ 
pared to the great reptiles of the Reptilian Age. Transmuta¬ 
tion has run in the wrong direction. In that age there were 
flving lizards sixty feet long, and frogs nearly as large as a 

t o C 1 / CJ 


20 


MACROCOSM US. 


modern elephant. These great monsters devoured their prey, 
and frolicked in the waters where now is the solid earth of the 
British Isles. If there had been transmutation from these 
species, I am of the opinion that some modern Darwinians 
would long since have emigrated. 

We now turn to the last leaf in the geological record, and 
come to the Mammalian Age, to which age man also belongs. 
Before, however, man was introduced, some marvelous changes 
took place, and we can very properly place man in an age bv 
himself. All the orders belonging to the Mammalian Age passed 
away before man’s advent upon this beautiful earth. Amid 
some of the most terrific convulsions the animals of the Mamma¬ 
lian Age perished, with as sudden a death as that of the savage 
monsters of the preceding age. The temperature seems to 
have fallen suddenly to a freezing point, and some of the 
animals, overtaken in the mud of Siberia, have been excavated, 
arid the flesh was so perfectly preserved that it was eaten by 
dogs. What becomes of the transmutation theory in this last 
geological period? According to Professor Dana, the ox ap¬ 
peared in the Tertiary period before the monkey. We do 
not know the exact time when man was introduced into this 
world; but we do know that he is the terminus of vertebral life. 
All geological preparations and ideas converge in him. The 
world seems to have been designed to stimulate the thinking 
powers of man. The beneficent design of God is seen in him 
who represents the finality of infinite design. Man is the focus 
of geological history, and all vertebrate development finds in 
him the highest and consummating type. The chasm which 
separates the intelligence of man from the instinct of brutes 
is indeed broad, and one that can not be spanned without the 
intervention of God. Man is the only animal that worships, 
and he consequently has a relationship to God that the rest of 
animals has not. 

2. The Mosaic Record. “In the beginning God created 
the liearvens and the earth.” No words that, have ever been 
penned by man are more sublime than this language in the 
first chapter of the Bible. It condemns Atheism, for it was 


T«E PROBLEM OF CREATION. 


2 1 


God who created the heavens and the earth. It condemns 
Pantheism, for the heavens and earth are not God, but were 
created by him. It condemns Materialism, for material sub¬ 
stances came from a substance not material. The things that 
are seen were not made of things that do appear. The Word 
was in the beginning, and by him God created the heavens and 
the earth. 

The first chapter of Genesis appears to be divided into two 
periods of three days each, both of the periods commencing 
with light. The first period represents the inorganic; and the 
second, the organic world. The light of the first was cosmical, 
that of the second was to direct days and seasons on the earth. 
Each period ends in a day of two great works. On the third 
day God divided the land from the water ; then he created 
vegetation, which was a work very different. On the sixth 
day Jehovah created quadrupeds; then he created man, which 
was the greatest work of all. 

The following from Professor Dana will be read with inter¬ 
est.: “I belieye not only the first verse of Genesis to be true, 
but each verse to be worthy of its place in the Bible. I would 
not separate the first verse from its pronounced theism, and 
call the next an adapted fable, meaning thereby that it is little 
worth studying and interpreting, for I find no evidence of this 
in the chapter itself, which has God’s approbation stamped 
on each day’s work, nor in the events announced when viewed 
in the aid of modern science. If the narrative must be regarded 
as one of several documents that were compiled to make up the 
early portion of the Bible, as some Biblical scholars hold, ] 
would still claim for it a place among the earliest and most 
extraordinary of historical records, and none the less divine, 
none the less worthy of study.” 

The word day is used in at least three senses in the Bible. 
First, it denotes the light part of the period called day, in con¬ 
trast with the dark part. Second, it denotes both the light 
and dark parts of the day. “The evening and the morning 
were the first day.” Third, it denotes an indefinite period of 
time. The entire period of creation is called a day, and we 


22 


MACROCOSMUS. 


read of the day of the Son of man. Xot long since I heard J. B. 
Briney deliver some interesting lectures along this line at the 
Texas Lectureship. Bead carefully the following from Pro¬ 
fessor Dana on the use of the word day: “With correct views 
on this point, we can not fail to recognize that days of twenty- 
four hours are as much opposed to the spirit of Bible cosmog¬ 
ony as they are to the majesty of the Deity himself and the 
declarations of his workings in the earth's structure. More¬ 
over, it is hardly possible that Moses, who wrote the—see the 
ninetieth Psalm, which is ascribed to Moses: TV thousand years 
in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is pastand ‘Before 


the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou liadst formed 
the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, 
thou art God'—entertained so belittling an idea of the Cre¬ 
ator and his work.” 

It does appear to me that any candid student of the geologi¬ 
cal and the Mosaic records will not fail to see that it required 
inspiration on the part of Moses to have written such a faithful 
outline of geological history. While the Bible was not given 
for the special purpose of teaching science, it certainly does, 
when properly understood, harmonize with true science. 


SECTION III.-GENESIS AND EVOLUTION. 

Evolution is not by any means a new doctrine. It was 
taught by some great thinkers in the early history of the race. 
Gautama, whom Edwin Arnold calls the Light of Asia, taught 
evolution very 'much as it is taught at the present time. The 
Brahmins taught that spirit was developed into matter, but 
the Buddhists taught the opposite—that matter was developed 
into spirit. The Egyptians, who taught that life originated 
in the slime of the Mile, were evolutionists. The Greek phi¬ 
losopher Anaximander taught a theory of evolution six hun¬ 
dred years before Christ. He taught that the earth acquired 
its present solidity through the evaporation of the muddy water 
of the ocean. In this mud he thought that life originated. The 
smaller animals, he taught, developed into larger ones until 
finally man appeared, who was first an aquatic animal. It is 




THE PROBLEM OE CREATION. 


23 


interesting to observe how similar is this theory to that of 
modern evolutionists. Through the Greeks the evolution 
hypothesis was introduced to the modern Europeans. I do not 
object to evolution when it is used in the sense of progress. 
In fact, 1 think the Bible comes nearer proving evolution than 
science does. I was once a member of Prof. Alexander Win- 
chelFs Geology class. Dr. Winchell was a Tlieistic Evolution¬ 
ist, and quoted the Bible to sustain his position. “Let the 
earth bring* forth,” and “Let tfhe waters bring forth," lie 
thoughtfully sustained evolution. While the Bible teaches 
the fact of creation, it certainly does not fully teach the 
method. 

I only object to evolution when it includes spontaneous 
generation and the theory of materialistic transmutation of 
species. Darwin, Tyndall and Huxley admit that there is no 
foundation for the theory of spontaneous generation. Mr. 
Darwin declared that spontaneous generation was absolutely 
inconceivable ; and Dr. Carpenter, one of the highest authori¬ 
ties England has ever produced, pronounced it an astound¬ 
ing hypothesis. The great Tyndall says that the evidence 
offered in favor of spontaneous generation is vitiated by 


error. 

The theory of materialistic transmutation of species is an 
assumption as groundless as that of spontaneous generation. 
The greatest advocates of evolution tell us that the theory of 
transmutation of species can not be verified by observation, and 
experiment, and without verification a theoretic conception is 
a mere figment of the intellect. The philosopher Kant has said: 
“Give me matter, and I will explain the formation of the world; 
but give me matter only, and I can not explain the formation of 
a caterpillar.” Darwin him self was not a good Darwinian, 
according to the agnostic and atheistic theory of evolution. 

The evolution hypothesis is beautiful, when evolution is 
only used in the sense of progress. Eor example, there was 
progress from the canoe to the keel-boat, from the keel-boat, to 
the sailboat, and from the sailboat to the steamboat. It would, 
however, be the most consummate nonsense to talk of the trails- 


24 


MACROCOSMUS. 


mutation of one into another. There is certainly gradual prog¬ 
ress from one to another, but it is more the progress of mind 
than of matter. 

Some persons get frightened at the very name evolu¬ 
tion, without understanding its meaning. In the last chapter 
of the “Origin of Species/’ Mr. Darwin claims that all living 
beings have been developed from four genus representing mol- 
lusks, radiates, articulates and vertebrates. These, he sup¬ 
posed, were superna.tura.lly created. There is certainly noth 
ing in this to contradict the Bible. Dr. McCosli defines 
evolution as organized causation. Gladstone says: “Evolu¬ 
tion is to me a series with development." Professor Le Conte 
says: “Evolution is a continuous progressive change accord¬ 
ing to certain laws by means of resident forces.” 

Infidels have tried to monopolize evolution*, and class all 
evolutionists with themselves. This is very unjust; for some 
of the greatest evolutionists are Christians. Evolution and 
Christianity are certainly not the antipodes of each other. 
Whatever we may be willing to say favorable to evolution, we 
must not forget, however, that it is an unproved hypothesis. 
Professor Virchow, the greatest of German biologists, at the 
great Anthropological Congress which met at Vienna some 
time ago, used the following language: “For a quarter of a 
century we have in vain sought for the intermediate stages 
which were supposed to connect man with the ape. The proto- 
man, the pro-anthropos, is not yet discovered. For anthropo¬ 
logical science, the pro-antliropos is not even a subject, of dis¬ 
cussion. The anthropologist may perhaps see him in a dream, 

but as soon as he awakes he can not see that he has made, anv 

0 

app roach towards him. At this moment we are able to sav 
that among the peoples of antiquity no single race was any 
nearer to the apes than we are. At this moment I can affirm 
that there is not upon earth any absolute unknown race of men. 
It can be positively demonstrated that in the course of 5,000 
years no change of type worthy of mention has taken place. If 
you ask me whether the first man was white or black, T can onlv 
say I do not know. Twenty years ago the leaders of our sci- 


THE PROBLEM OF CREATION. 


25 


ence asserted that they knew many things which, as a matter 
of fact, they did not know/” 

In concluding this chapter, I want to call your attention 
to the following gaps in development mentioned by Dr. Mc- 
Cosh: 

1. Development can not account for the origination of this 
universe. There can only be development among materials 
already existing. Aristotle and all profound thinkers main¬ 
tain that the mind naturally seeks after origin. 

2. There is power which works in development for which 
development itself can not account. Call this power what you 
please, the persistence of force, or the conservation of energy, 
it implies something back of it that gives it potency. Even 
Mr. Spencer knows enough about this absolute certainty to 
call it the unknowable. 

3. Ho theory of development can account for the beneficent 
laws and special ends we see in nature. The student of nature 
finds order and adaptation everywhere, and these things cer¬ 
tainly point to the Supreme Architect of the universe who has 
arranged everything for the welfare of man. 


CHAPTER III. 

Problems in the Higher Criticism. 


INTRODUCTION. 

I have no sympathy with the spirit in winch some attack 
the higher criticism. It is very similar to the attacks that 
were once made upon astronomy and geology. The higher crit¬ 
icism is a science, and we thank God for all the good that it 
may accomplish. When it leaves the true scientific method, 
and adopts that of the destructive critics, we then, of course, 
have no sympathy with it. A distinction should always be 
made between the higher criticism and destructive criticism. 
A criticism of the text of Scripture is called the lower criticism, 
and an inquiry into the origin of the Bible is called the higher 
criticism. The higher criticism is really an historical science. 
Infidels take hold of this as they do of all other sciences, and 
try to push it into skepticism. This skeptical tendency is what 
we call destructive criticism. Christians can no more afford 
to let infidels control the higher criticism than they can afford 

O V 

to let them control other science. 


PROBLEM I.-WHO WROTE THE PENTATEUCH 


In the last chapter of Luke, Christ, referring to the Old 
Testament, calls it “the law of Moses, the prophets, and the 
psalms.” Bv “the psalms” was meant all the poetical books; 
the prophets included all the rest of the Old Testament ex¬ 
cept the Pentateuch. This name has been applied to the first 
five books of the Bible ever since the days of Origen. Nehe- 
mi all certainly refers to it as the law, or the book of the law 

t j 

(Xeh. viii. 1-3 ; ix. 3 ; xiii. 1). In the Septuagint it is divided 

into separate hooks; but how long this was done before this 

translation was made, we do not know. Josephus, in his work 

against Apion, mentions the five books of Moses as divine, and 

savs that they contain his laws and the traditions of the origin 
20 


PROBLEMS IN THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 


27 


of mankind till his death. This position was almost univer¬ 
sally accepted until after the Reformation. 

In the seventeenth century, bold attacks began to be made 
upon the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. It was assailed 
by Hobbs in his “Leviathan;" by Spinoza, in his “Tracts;" and 
by Richard Simon, the Roman Catholic, in his “Critical His- 
tory of the Old Testament.” In 1780, Eichliorn wrote his 
noted “Introduction to' the Old Testament,” in which he em¬ 
ployed the methods of the higher criticism. He claimed that 
Moses, used different, documents in his work; but held firmly 
to the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, except certain edi¬ 
torial notes afterwards added. The scholarly and critical Eich- 

d 

horn was not far wrong in this position. 

Bishop Colenso wrote a critical work on the Pentateuch 
and the Book of Joshua, which failed to attract attention in 
England; but it seems to have inspired Kuenen to write his 
destructive works which deny altogether the supernatural in 
the Bible. The gifted Wellhausen also carried his destructive 


methods to a great extreme. The scholarly Hillman opposed 
the extreme views of both Kuenen and Wellhausen, and main¬ 
tained that the Bible contains a revelation from God. Hr. 
Hriver, and other English scholars of the higher critics, are 
firm believers in the supernatural element in the Bible, and 
there seems now to be quite a reaction against the extreme ten¬ 


dencies of the destructive critics. 

I have given a good deal of attention to the investigation 

of this subject, and I am satisfied that a good deal of concession 

will have to be made to the higher critics. It is evident to 

every candid critic that the Pentateuch was edited by the in- 
«> 

sertion of notes after it left the hands of Moses. A good ex¬ 
ample of this is found in Gen. xxxvi. 31. Ezra made verbal 
explanations of the recovered law of Moses after the Baby¬ 
lonian exile. He doubtless annotated the Pentateuch, and did 
for it in writing what he had done orally. This explains, to 
mv mind, many of the peculiarities which are supposed to indi¬ 
cate a post-Mosaic origin for the Pentateuch. It must also 
be conceded that Moses probably used different documents in 


28 


MACEOCOSMUS. 


the composition of the Book of Genesis-. It may also be admit¬ 
ted that there is really a basis for many of the distinctions 
drawn between the book of the covenant, the priest-code, and 
the Deuteronomic coda I can not see how even these distinc¬ 
tions can destroy the evidence in favor of the Mosaic author- 

V 

ship of the Pentateuch. The destructive critics have long 
maintained that “Elohim” and “Jehovah” are sufficient evi¬ 
dence of different authors. It is a fact that before the days of 
Moses the Egyptians used these names for the Deity; and 
Egyptologists claim that they frequently applied a great variety 
of names to the same Deity. 

In reference to the time when the Pentateuch was written, 
by careful examination I am fully satisfied that it was not writ¬ 
ten less than thirteen centuries before the coming of the Mes¬ 
siah. I will now proceed to make this statement good. 

1. The new science of archaeology sustains this position. 
During the past twenty-five years this new science has made 
wonderful revelations; and in nothing more wonderful than the 
support it gives us in favor of the Mosaic authorship of the 
Pentateuch. This new science has also developed some of the 
greatest scholars in the world ; and many of them are certainly 
not inferior to any of the names belonging to the destructive 
critics. The destructive critics claim that all religions origi¬ 
nated in fetishism, then developed into polytheism, and from 
polytheism into monotheism. Archaeology clearly places limi¬ 
tations upon this position. Many of the leading archaeologists 
claim that monotheism was taught in Egypt at least two thou¬ 
sand years before Christ. Egyptologists are perfectly agreed 
that, monotheism was established as the religion of the state for 
a time, at least, during the eighteenth dvnasty. 

It is evident from archaeology that the Egyptians, the Syr* 
ians and the Babylonians had reached a high state of civiliza- 
tion fifteen or twenty centuries before the Christian era. In 
fact, Egypt was a well-organized monarchy three thousand 
years before Christ. Its religion was established, and it pos¬ 
sessed a language and written characters. The same thing can 
be said of the Babvlonians and the Svrians. Recent discoveries 


PROBLEMS IN THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 


20 


show constant written intercourse between Egypt and Syria. 
Iliese nations made considerable progress in astronomy, and 
particularly in some of the line arts. In the history of art, spe¬ 
cial attention is given to Egyptian art. In some respects, the 
ancient Egyptians were considered masters. It is true that 
their art perished with the despotism that gave it birth, but it 
certainly had some very high qualities. 

It appears plain to me that historic science supports the 
position that the Pentateuch was written during the golden age 
of Hebrew literature, and not. in the times of the Persian kings. 
Idle Pentateuch is written in a simple style, and its poems are 
pure and lofty. Some of them bear quite a likeness to early 
Egyptian poems; and we know that Moses, was educated in 
Egypt. Moses lived exactly at the proper time to have pro¬ 
duced just such a work as is the Pentateuch. It was the golden 
age of Egyptian and Asiatic literature. The learned Meyer 
says: “The narrative of the exodus of the Hebrews rests upon 
certain knowledge of the region of Succoth and its border fort¬ 
resses.” Lenormant says: ‘‘The narrative of the exodus bears 
unmistakable marks of historical truth, and agrees most hap¬ 
pily with the state of things at the time of Merenptah.” Pep¬ 
sins, from the standpoint of archaeology, thus speaks of the 
tenth chapter of Genesis: “Where we find, as in this list of 
nations, on the whole so correct a knowledge of peoples and 
their languages which we can still in a large degree decide upon, 
we must also in particulars concede great weight to its state¬ 
ments.” 

2. The Pentateuch testifies to its own origin. We read in 
Ex. xxxiv. 28 of the writing of the ten commandments upon 
the two tables, which plainly teaches that Moses is the author 
of the Decalogue. In Ex. xxiv. 4 we learn that Moses wrote all 
the words of the Lord ; and in the fifth verse these words are 
identified with the covenant. In Ex. xvii. 14 God commanded 
Moses to write for a memorial in a book an account of the con¬ 
flict. with Amalek. We read in Dent. xxxi. 9 that Moses wrote 
this law, and in the t wen tv-fourth verse that lie made an end of 
writing the words of this law T in a. book. What is meant by this 

o u 


80 


MAC no C O S M u s. 


law { We learn from the tenth verse of the chapter above men¬ 
tioned that this law should be read every seven years at the 
feast of tabernacles before all Israel, to instruct the people in 
their duties toward Jehovah. It was, then, a book so arranged 
as to be read and to impress upon the people their duty on such 
an occasion. While the references given Jo not prove that 
Moses wrote all the Pentateuch, they certainly prove that ho 
wrote a very important part of it. It is also evident that the 
author of the other books of the Pentateuch was also the author 
of Genesis; for Genesis is the foundation of the other books. 
This is generally acknowledged, and it is .also plain that the 
author of Genesis was well acquainted with Egyptian affairs. 
In reference to the last four books of the Pentateuch, whether 
Moses wrote them or not, it is very significant that a large part 
of their contents was given hv God to Moses. 

3. IJie testimony of the historical books of the Old Testa- 
ment to the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. These books 
do not so much contain the history of Israel as a history of 

e i «.' 

God’s providential dealings with Israel. I once heard Willis 
J. Beecher deliver a very interesting course of lectures on these 
books at the Chautauqua. University. lie showed quite coneln- 
sivelv that thev testify to the Mosaic authorship of the Penta- 
tench. Of course, we mean by this the Pentateuch as a whole; 
for all candid critics admit that some things were added to it 
after it left the hand of Moses, and even editors after the Baby¬ 
lonian exile mav have added some things. It is universally ad- 
mi tied that the Book of Joshua, in its present form, presup¬ 
poses the Pentateuch in its present form. Some claim that 
Joshua was originally a part of the Pentateuch. In chap, 
xxiv. 20 the book of the law of God is said to have additions 
made to it by Joshua.; so the law was not regarded as a finished 
canon at the death of Moses', but to be continued by liis succes¬ 
sors. Ezra and Mehemiah were evidently written bv the great 
leaders whose names they bear; and their testimony to the Mo- 
saic authorship of the Pentateuch is quite strong. Tn fact, no 
sensible man doubts that these writers had before them the Pen¬ 
tateuch in substantially its present form. The word “law” oc- 


PROBLEMS IN THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 


31 


curs many times in tho Hebrew and Aramaic of these books, 
and it nearly always has reference to a single written book, 
lhe Books of Kings were probably written during the lifetime 
o± Jeremiah. Hilkiah the high priest found the book of the 
law in the house of Jehovah; and he gave it to Shaphan the 
scribe, who read it (11. Kings xxii. 8). This brought about 
the reformation under Josiali. The evidence in the Books of 
Kings is positive as to the existence of the written book of the 


law of Moses during the period covered by these books. 

Those who advocate a late origin for the Pentateuch claim 
that the Books of Judges, Ruth, First and Second Samuel have 
no reference whatever to it. In this, they are certainly mis¬ 
taken. It is true that the condition of affairs during the judges 
and the reign of Saul was such that the Mosaic law could not be 
strictly observed. It is asserted by the destructive critics that 
these books never mention the torah. The noun “torah” is used 
in II. Sam vii. 19 and the cognate verb in I. Sam. vii. 23; 
Judg. xiii. 8. In Judg. xi. 17-19 there is evidently a reference 
to the twentieth and twenty-first chapters of Numbers. There 
are also other references to books of the Pentateuch ; so we use 
what are called the silent books as witnesses to the antiquity of 
the Pentateuch. 

The Books of Chronicles were evidently written some time 
after the Babylonian exile. Their testimony to the antiquity 
of the Aaronic priesthood and the existence of the Levitical 
laws during the monarchy is beyond doubt. In fact, it is so 
interwoven with the entire narrative that a separation is im¬ 
possible. The destructive critics try to destroy this testimony, 
and this shows that their cause is weak. The theory of a pious 
fraud will not bear the test ; for the prophets would certainly 
have condemned such a writer. The testimony of Chronicles, 
therefore, can not be broken down; so the Pentateuch belongs 
to the Mosaic age and not to a post-exilic age. 

4. The prophetic books of the Old Testament may he 
brought in as witnesses to the Mosaic authorship of the Penta¬ 
teuch. The prophet Isaiah lived in Judah more than seven cen¬ 
turies B. C. He not only refers to institutions that belonged 


MACROCOSMUS. 


og 

OJj 


to the wilderness; but positively mentions the torali (Isa. v. 24; 
viii. 10; viii. 20). These passages evidently refer t-o the law 
of Moses. To what except the Pentateuch can this language 
refer: ‘‘They have transgressed the laws, changed the ordi¬ 
nance, broken the everlasting covenant” (Isa. xxiv. 5) ? ITosea, 
who prophesied in the eighth century B. C., makes a number 
of references to the Pentateuch. “I will also cause all her 
mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her Sabbaths, 
and all her solemn feasts” (TIos. ii. 11). Can any one question 
in such language a knowledge of the Pentateuch ? In chap, 
iv. 6 we have the following: “Thou hast forsaken the law [to- 
rah] of thy God.” In TIos. v. 10 there is certainly a reference 
to Dent, xix. 4; xxvii. 17. The. prophet Amos flourished in the 
kingdom of Israel during the eighth century B. C. He. not 
only mentions different institutions in the Pentateuch, but di¬ 
rectly mentions the torali. “They have despised the law [to- 
rah] of the Lord, and have not kept his commandments” (Amos 
ii. 4). The prophet’s description of the Xazarites shows plainly 
that, he had the Pentateuch. I might also give a number of ref- 
erences from Joel, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah, and, in fact, 
from all the prophets. The prophet Malachi, the last prophet 
mentioned in the Old Testament, uses the following language : 
“Remember ye the law [torah] of Moses my servant, which 
I commanded unto him in Jloreb for all Israel, with the stat¬ 
utes and judgments” (Mai. iv. 4). 

5. The poetic books of the Old Testament testify to the 
Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. Psalms, that are gener¬ 
ally admitted to be Davidic, refer to the Pentateuch. Almost 
the exact language of the eighteenth Psalm is found in II. Sam. 
xxii., and eveii De Wette admits it to be Davidic. Ewald ad¬ 
mits that David wrote the nineteenth Psalm. This Psalm 


speaks of the law of Jehovah, the testimony of Jehovah, and 
the statutes of Jehovah. The writer certainlv had the law of 

t / 

Moses. The Book of Proverbs contains a number of references 
to the commands of the Pentateuch. Prov. iii. 11, 12 is 
based upon Dent. viii. 5. Tn Prov. xi. 1 we have this language: 
“A false balance is abomination to the Lord.” Turn to Dent, 


P HOB LEMS IN THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 


33 

xxv. 13-16, and you will have no trouble in understanding this 
language. The reference to usury in Prov. xxviii. 8 is based 
upon the Mosaic precept against usury. We might give many 
other examples from the poetic books; but we have given suffi¬ 
cient to show that they plainly recognize the law of Moses. 

6. Christ and his apostles endorsed the Mosaic authorship 
of the Pentateuch. This is in perfect harmony with the addi¬ 
tions that may have been made by editors after the days of 
Moses. 1 do not see how any one can study the Mew 7 Testament 
references to Moses and the law, and doubt the Mosaic author¬ 
ship of the Pentateuch. 

In the parable of Dives and Lazarus, Jesus represents Abra¬ 
ham as saying: “They have Moses and the prophets; let them 
hear them. If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither 
will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead” (Luke 
xvi. 29-31). In Luke xxiv. 4-4 we have these words from the 
lips of Jesus: “These are the words which I spake unto you. 
while I was vet with you, that all things must be ful¬ 
filled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in 
the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.” Many 
other quotations might be given; but these are sufficient 
to show that Jesus believed as did Josephus and other 
Jewish writers, that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch. 
Our Saviour plainly speaks of the written lav; of Moses, and 
that Moses wrote of him. His hearers had no difficulty in un¬ 
derstanding what he meant when he referred to the written law 
of Moses. In fact, the Septuagint version had been in existence 
more than two centuries, and the Gentiles as well as the Jews 
could read the law of Moses. Even the Samaritans had the 
Pentateuch, and their version is of great antiquity. These 
things can never be explained in harmony with the position of 
the destructive critics. 

The statements of the apostles are in perfect harmony with 
those of their Lord. Paul in his defense before Agrippa uses 
this language : “Having therefore obtained help of God, I con¬ 
tinue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying 
none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did 


34 


MACROCOSMUS. 


say should come'’ (Acts xxvi. 22 ). Paul certainly believed in 
the inspiration of the Old Testament, and that Moses wrote an 
important part of it. Moses was the most important personage 
of the Old Testament, and if we are to believe the testimony of 
Christ and his apostles, the Mosaic law was of divine origin. 
The following language from the pen of the learned Dr. Schafi 
is worthv of very careful thought: “Moses wrote of Christ, as 
the seed of the woman that shall bruise the serpent’s head (Gen. 
iii.), as the seed of Abraham by which all the nations of the 
earth are to be blessed (Gen. xii.), as the Shiloh unto whom 
shall be the gathering of the people (Gen. xlix.), as the Star out 
of Jacob, and the Sceptre that shall rise out of Israel (A urn. 
xxiv. IT), as the great Prophet whom God will raise up, and 
unto whom the Jews shall hearken(Deut. xviii.). Moreover, the 
moral law of Mcses, by revealing the holy will of God and set¬ 
ting up a standard of human righteousness in conformity with 
that will, awakens a knowledge of sin and guilt (Pom. iii. 20; 
vii. 7), and thus serves as a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ 
(Gal. iii. 24). Finally, the ritual law and all the ceremonies 
of Mosaic worship were typical of the Christian dispensation 
(Col. ii. 17), as the healing serpent in the wilderness pointed 
to Christ on the cross (hum. xxi. 9; John iii. 14). This is a 
most important testimony, from the unerring mouth of Christ, 
to the Messianic character and aim of the whole Mosaic dispen¬ 
sation, and to the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch.” 

In concluding this part of the subject, I urge the following 
.objections to the position of the destructive critics: (1) The 
author of the Pentateuch was a witness of the events he re¬ 
corded. (2) It is useless to sav that Moses did not have ability 
to write the Pentateuch, for he was educated in all the learning 
of the Egyptians. The Egyptians at that time had extensive 
literary works. (3) Egyptologists are constantly confirming 
events described in the Pentateuch. (4) The language of the 
Pentateuch is pure Hebrew, and differs from the language used 
by the writers during and after the captivity. (5) If some 
post-captivity writer had been the author of the books attribu¬ 
ted to (Moses, his name would certainly have been known. (6) 


PROBLEMS IN TILE HIGHER CRITICISM. 


35 


Ilia Jews tuo carefully guarded their sacred books to have re¬ 
ceived works written by others, and imposed upon the people 
as the writings of their great lawgiver. (7) The prophets 
would have rebuked and exposed any priest who would have 
dared to attempt such a thing. (8) It is evident that there was 
a priesthood in the days of Closes, for there was a priestly caste 
in Egypt. It is hardly probable that this priesthood would 
have waited a thousand years for a ritual. (0) The destructive 
critics leave a long period of important history without any lit¬ 
erature ; and thus give no basis for the great prophetic produc¬ 
tions of the eighth century before Christ. (10) Xo one can well 
question the fact that the writings of Moses were revised after 
the captivity, but this only tends to confirm the authorship of 
Moses. The Pentateuch evidently had inspired editors after 
the death of Moses. 


PROBLEM II.-WHO WROTE ISAIAH ? 

The destructive critics have made a persistent attack upon 
the Book of Isaiah. Tliev claim that the last half was written 

e/ 

by some unknown prophet of the exile. This may be true, but 
I would like to know the name of the prophet. I urge the fol¬ 
lowing objections to this position: (1) If such a prophet had 
lived, his name would certainly be known, for he would have 
been one of the greatest of the prophets. (2) The pre-exilic 
authorship is confirmed by passages from Jeremiah and Zeph- 
aniah. (3) These contested chapters are written in the style 
of the great prophet. (4) The early chapters form a prelude 
to the grandest part written by the prophet in his old age. 

PROBLEM Iir.-WHAT IS INSPIRATION ? 

» 

We should not confound the inspiration of the Bible with 
the question of its supernatural origin. Christianity might be 
true and of divine origin, and yet its writers not be inspired 
We accept the facts of history, and yet the historical writers 
are not inspired. Inspiration is important, but it is not every¬ 
th iiui\ as some winters seem to think. Even uninspired men 
might bo competent witnesses to the facts proving the divinity 
of Christ According to “Greenleaf on Evidence/’ such eer- 


MACIiOCOS-MUS. 


o 

t) 


6 


tainly could be the case. “Wliat think ye of the Christ \ is 
the fundamental religious question of the world, and it is much 
more important than even the question of inspiration. I am 
glad that Dr. Briggs, whatever may be his mistakes, empha¬ 
sizes the Christology of the Bible. Soane even great writers do 
not seem to discriminate between inspiration and revelation. 
Revelation is the way in which the original writers obtained 
the things they wrote, while inspiration refers to the assistance 
they received in imparting this revelation. 

The following are the strongest proofs to my mind of the 
inspiration of the Bible: (1) The books themselves bear the 
impress of inspiration. I do not believe that any man, who 
will study the Bible without prejudice and lias mind enough to 
understand it, will question inspiration on the part of the Bible 
writers. (2) The apostles received supernatural endowments. 
INTo one can question this without denying the authority of the 


IS! ew Testament. Christ positively promised supernatural gifts 
to his apostles. (3) The writers themselves claim inspiration. 
Paul definitely affirms inspiration on the part of the sacred 
writers (II. Tim. iii. 1G, IT). 

A number of theories of inspiration have been advanced, but 
none are satisfactorv. The automatic theorv makes man sim- 

«/ tf 

ply a machine in the hands of the Holy Spirit. It destroys 
human agency, and there is certainly a human element in the 
Bible. I believe in emphasizing the divine element in the Bi¬ 
ble, but there can be no good reason for leaving out the human. 
The anthropological theory gives the sacred writers no'more in¬ 
spiration than had Milton and Dante. This is directly the op¬ 
posite of the one we have just mentioned. This emphasizes the 
human element to the exclusion of the divine. The psycholog¬ 
ical theory claims that the Bible writers were inspired so far 
as thought was concerned, but that these thoughts were always 
•expressed in their own language without any assistance what¬ 
ever. This is much nearer the truth than the other theories, 
but it goes too far. Christ not only promised his apostles as¬ 
sistance in what they should sav, but also in how they should 
say it. 


PROBLEMS IX THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 


37 


It is quite probable that the true scientific theory of inspi¬ 
ration is not yet understood. I do not believe that any theory 
can be accepted by the conscientious student of the Bible which, 
excludes either the natural, the providential or miraculous ele¬ 
ments. That there are portions of the Bible which required 
nothing more than the natural is probable; for God would cen- 
tainlv use the natural so far as it.was sufficient. But to claim 

t/ 

that the natural was sufficient for the production of the whole 
Bible, contradicts the plainest teaching of the Boob. Inspira¬ 
tion is claimed on the part of the sacred writers, and if we 
accept them as honest witnesses, we must admit that they spake 
as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. 

PROBLEM IV.-IS THE BIBLE IXERRANT ? 

I think it is in the purposes for which it was given. It 
does not contain a perfect system of astronomy; for it was not 
given to teach astronomy. It was given to teach men how to 
go to heaven, and not how the heavens go. God’s revelation 
to man in the Bible is certainly inerrant, and inspiration, I 
believe, guarantees inerrancy in teaching the way of salvation. 
The Bible is an infallible rule of both faith and practice. The 
following from Paul is plain on this point: “Every scripture 
inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for 
correction, for instruction which is in righteousness: that the 
man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every 
good work.” While God’s revelation is truly precious, Paul 
says: “We have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the exceed- 
ing greatness of the power may be of God, and not from our¬ 
selves.” We must not, because the treasure is pure gold, con¬ 
clude that the vessel is also golden, and that it is profane if 
anv blemishes are found in it; nor must we conclude that the 

KJ 

treasure and vessel are both of the earth. Paul s thought was 
that the imperfections found in the organs of revelation should 
only serve to make brighter the glory of the divine message. 

While I do not endorse all that Dr. Briggs says in the fol¬ 
lowing, it shows quite conclusively that he is far from being 
an infidel: “The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments 


38 


MACROCOSM US. 


were immediately inspired by God, but that inspiration did not 
make them inerrant in matters of science. They have been 
kept pure in all ages, so far as their purpose of grace, their mes¬ 
sage of salvation, their rule of faith and practice, is concerned, 
but they are not inerrant now, and it is not probable that they 
ever were inerrant in matters of chronology. They are suffi¬ 
cient to give that knowledge <?f God and his will which is neces¬ 
sary unto salvation ; but they are not sufficient to give the knowl¬ 
edge of astronomy and botany. They are the only infallible 
rule of faith and practice; but they are not the only infallible 
rule of agriculture and navigation, of commerce and trade, of 
war and finance. The Scriptures are pure, holy, errorless, so 
far as their own purpose of grace is concerned, as the only in¬ 
fallible rule of the liolv religion, the holy doctrine, the liolv 
life. They are altogether perfect in those divine things that 
come from heaven to constitute the divine kingdom on earth, 
which, with patient, quiet, peaceful, but irresistible might, goes 
forth from the liolv center through all the radius of the circle 
of human affairs, and persists until it transforms the earth and 
man." 

While the Bible was not given to teach the sciences, I do 
not believe, when it is fairly interpreted, that it ever contra¬ 
dicts the highest scientific culture. It is certain that many of 
the greatest scientists of modern times have taken this position. 
It is true that many scientists pay no attention to the question; 
but those who have given it most attention have been surprised 
at the wonderful harmony there is between science and the 
Bible. 

I have not only read the Old and New Testaments in their 

t/ 

original, but I have also given a good deal of attention to the 
study of the Bible in the languages in which it was originally 
written ; but I confess that I have not been able to find in the 
Bible Ihe errors that some persons are constantly finding. Some 
time ago, the secretary of Victoria Institute sent me a copy of 
an address by Professor Savee, of Oxford, on a royal library 
dating from the fifteenth century B. C., which has been un¬ 
earthed in Egypt, and which shows that the account of Melchiz- 


PROBLEMS IN THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 


39 


edek in the fourteenth chapter of Genesis is something more 
than myth. I quote from it the following: “And a comparison 
of the fourteenth chapter of Genesis with the contents of the 
letters of Ebed-tob lias shown us that contemporaries of Samuel 
actually did consult them; the description of Melchizedek, king 
of Salem, mythical as it has often been alleged to he, turns out 
to be in strict accordance with fact. Nothing can prove more 
clearly that neither the ancient records of Jerusalem nor a 
knowledge of their contents had perished when the Book of 
Genesis was written; and what was true of Jerusalem must 
have been true of other cities in Palestine as well.” 

We should deal fairly with the Bible, and not be hasty in 
our conclusions. Some of the destructive critics w rite of errors 
in the original autographs of the Holy Scriptures, as if they 
had. carefully examined such autographs. This is decidedly 
reckless; for, as a matter of fact, no one has seen such auto¬ 
graphs for more than a dozen centuries. It is a question of 
pure speculation, and can, doubtless, never he settled. I am 
fully satisfied that in the best manuscripts we now have, no se¬ 
rious error can he found; and if we can eliminate- from 
them all the errors of interpolation and transcription, we will, 
then, certainly reduce them to a minimum. If such is the case 
with present manuscripts, how pure indeed must be the original 
autographs! 


CHAPTER IV. 

The Problem of Christo logy. 


C'hristology is from two Greek words meaning a discourse 
about Christ. If there is such a thing as historical science, then 
C'hristology is the highest of historical sciences. Mr. Huxley 
says: “The question as to what Jesus really said and did is a 
strictly scientific problem which is capable of solution bv no 
other methods than those practiced by the historian and the lit¬ 
erary critic.” Christianity, as embodied in the person and 
character of Christ, has shown its adaptation to all races*; it 
has changed the character and conduct of the individual; it has 
purified and elevated society. Such a moral and spiritual force 
in this world is certainly worthy of careful scientific studv. Xo 
one can question the fact that the inductive method can be as 
well applied to Christology as to any other historical science. I 
do not hesitate to say that all the scientific methods can, in 
one way or another, be applied to Christianity. 

We have a number of comparative sciences, such as compar¬ 
ative philology, comparative anatomy and comparative physi¬ 
ology. By comparative philology we learn the civilization of 
the Aryan race before its migration into Europe. Wo find 
those things that were common to Latins, Greeks and Hindus in 
their primitive home in Asia. From a single bone of an ani¬ 
mal, Agassiz could tell all about the animal to which it belonged. 
He knew exactly the animal to which the bone was adapted. 
We have wonderful adaptation in nature; the eye is adapted 
to light, and the ear to sound; the lungs are adapted to air, 
and the gills are exactly adapted to water. In the study of 
anthropology, we find perfect adaptation in nature to the wants 
of'man. A\ lien he is hungry, food satisfies his wants; when he 
is thirsty, water, the pure beverage of life, slakes his thirst. In 
all the analogies of life, any want or incompleteness in any 
being in itself, is prima-faeie evidence that there is a source of 

40 




THE PROBLEM OF CHRISTO LOG V. 


41 


completeness outside of itself. Is man’s religious nature an ex¬ 
ception to this rule? We certainly have no reason for so think¬ 
ing. God has evidently made provisions for the religious na¬ 
ture of man. The Christ of history exactly meets the demands 
of man’s religious nature. While history represents many as 
worshiping idols, they really worshiped what they thought tile- 
idol represented. Even a fetich is feared because there is sup¬ 
posed to reside in it a mysterious power. Christ reveals God 
to mankind as a loving Father, and thus the longings of man's 
spiritual nature are satisfied. The spirituality and love of God 
as revealed in Christ, can not otherwise than draw forth those 
elements of worship belonging to the very nature of man. Sci¬ 
entifically speaking, we say that the character of God embodied 
in Christ, which evokes the worshipful feeling in man, is like 
the ocean to the fish, or the air to the. bird; it is the counterpart 
of man’s religious nature. 

The inductive study of typology and prophecy, as contained 
in the Old Testament, in their relationship to Christology, is 
indeed interesting investigation. I have recently read Dr. 
Briggs on “The Messianic Idealand I find in it very convin¬ 
cing evidence of the divine mission of Christ. Please 1 studv 
carefully the following from the pen of this higher critic : “Mo¬ 
ses predicts a prophet greater than himself who will complete 
the divine revelation. Prophets are raised up from time to 
time in the history of Israel bearing onward the standard of di¬ 
vine revelation. But none arose to be compared with Moses. 
The prophets were not welcomed by the people. They were a 
succession of sufferers and martyrs of whom the world was not 
worthy. The suffering prophet finds his depth of humiliation 
in the person of Jeremiah. The experience of Jeremiah is the 
basis of the suffering servant of the Psalms and prophecies of 
the exile. The time of the restoration passes, and no such 
phet appears. Centuries roll on, and prophets seem to have 
abandoned the people of God. At last, in the wilderness of Ju¬ 
dea, a prophet arises in the spirit and power of Elijah, and he 
points to the greater prophet who was at hand. At last the 
prophet like Moses appeared in Jesus of Xazareth, and he real- 


42 


MACROCOSM US. 


ized in his experience in life and in death the anticipations of 
the prophet of the exile. He accomplished the martyrdom of 
that prophet, and he completed the Mosaic revelation. He was 
the prophet in the wondrous words of religious instruction pre¬ 
served in the Gospels. He was a prophet in the predictions 
that he gave respecting his own life, death and resurrection, 
and respecting the kingdom of grace and the. kingdom of glory. 
He was a prophet also in a newer and higher sense in that he 
not only bore with him the presence and power of the Holv 
Spirit, but he bestowed that Spirit upon his apostles, and made 
his church prophetic.” 

Skeptics greatly object to the miraculous conception; but 
even this can he illustrated by science. Of course, I believe in 
the miracles connected with the birth of Christ ; but, for the 
sake of doubters, it is sometimes well to bring in the testimony 
of science. Professor Huxley claims that science teaches that 
there may be birth from a virgin. The scientific name for this 
is parthenogenesis. It is, then, unscientific to say that birth 
can never occur without, the intervention of two parents. 

The life and character of Christ perfectly corresponded 
with the miraculous conception. In fact, his sinless life is one 
of the greatest miracles of history. It establishes his supernat¬ 
ural mission, and shows that he had an exceptional relation¬ 
ship to God. There are but few skeptics who question the sin¬ 
less life of Christ. If any of the few happen to he among my 
readers, I ask them to consider carefully the following facts: 
(1) Christ is represented as having a faultless childhood; (2) 
John the Baptist recognized him as sinless; (3) In the temp¬ 
tation he was assailed by all the typical appeals to which hu¬ 
manity had always succumbed, vet in a perfectly natural way 
be resisted them without apparent effort; (4) Christ had a 
perfect will, and controlled all his faculties in harmony with 
the government of God ; (5) Ho was entirely unconscious of 
sin, and never showed anv signs of repentance ; (6) In his dis¬ 
cussions with his enemies, he was always right, and they were 
always wrong; (7) When there was a. difference between him 
and bis disciples, be was always right, and the disciples wers 


THE PROBLEM OF CHRISTOLOGY. 


43 


s wrong; (8) His spirit was catholic, in opposition to 
the narrowness of all his associates ; (9) Pie united traits of 
character which no one before had been able to unite; (10) 
In him the passive virtues were as perfect as the active; (11) 
Ilis teachings and his works bear the impress of perfection; 
(12) His conduct on the cross was really superhuman. All 
persons who will carefully apply the scientific method to the 
life of Christ can not otherwise than be convinced that lie was 
the Son of God. 

'Plie Christ of history was supernatural, but not unnatural. 
It. is well to draw this distinction, for some writers, in trying 
to magnify his divinity, make him entrely unnatural. While 
he was God manifested in the flesh, he was also perfect man¬ 
hood. He w r as perfect manhood in the fact that all his facul¬ 
ties were perfectly developed, and he was entirely free from 
sin. It is a mistake to suppose that sin is natural to man; it is 
most unnatural, and man can never reach perfection until 
he gets rid of sin. The life of Christ, then, in being sinless, 
was perfectly natural in the highest sense of the word. It was 
more than natural; but, at the same time, entirely natural. 
Christ was a perfect type for humanity. 

A lien all the circumstances are properly considered, even 
the'miracles of Christ are not unnatural. If a man without anv 

•I 

preconceived theory will read the Xew Testament, he will find 
the miracles inseparably connected with the rest, of the narra¬ 
tive, and so interwoven with it as to make a perfectly natural 
impression upon his mind. He will take it for granted that no 
such a book could exist in the. world entirely separated from 
the supernatural. In this connection l want to state, that even 
the destructive critics admit a sufficient amount of the Xev 
Testament to be genuine to fullv establish the miraculous ele- 
ment in the mission of Christ. 

It is well to apply the scientific method to the resurrection 
of Christ. This is the last fact of the gospel, and the greatest 
miracle of history. Tt is the miracle upon which the apostles 
specially dwelt. Paul seldom, if ever, mentions the other mir¬ 
acles; but constantly dwells upon the resurrection of Christ. 



44 


MACROCOSMUS. 


The epistles of Paul that all destructive critics admit to be gen¬ 
uine and authentic fully establish the great fact of the gospei 
that Christ rose from the. dead. We can take the admissions 
of skeptics themselves, and fully establish the truth of Chris¬ 
tianity. 

Lord Lyttelton and Gilbert West imbibed the principles of 
infidelity from a superficial view of the Bible. They felt fully 
persuaded that the Bible was an imposture, and were deter¬ 
mined to expose it, Lyttelton selected the conversion of Paul 
as the subject upon which to write, and West selected the resur¬ 
rection of Christ. The result of their investigation was the con¬ 
version of both of them; and they wrote unanswerable argu¬ 
ments in favor of Christianity from the subjects they had se¬ 
lected. 

Infidel writers have not been able to satisfy infidels them¬ 
selves on the question of Christ’s resurrection. Keim, the 
greatest of rationalistic writers, freely admits that the theories 
of the skeptics in reference to the resurrection of Christ had 
all been failures. These are his words: “If the visions are not 
a human product, not self-produced; if they are not the blossom 
and fruit of a bewildered over-excitement; if they are some¬ 
thing strange, mysterious; if they are accompanied at once 
with astonishingly clear perceptions and resolves—then it re¬ 
mains to fall back on a source of them not yet named: it is God. 


and the glorified Christ.” Professor Keim believes that the 
Spirit of Christ actually appeared to- the disciples. This is 
an important admission for a rationalist; and it teaches the su¬ 
pernatural. This theory, however, is not in harmony with the 
fact that Thomas handled his Lord. Jesus condemns this the¬ 
ory in the following language: “Handle me and see, A spirit 
hath not flesh and bones as I have.” It is said that when Xean- 
der read I)e Wet t o’s statement that the fact of the resurrection 
of Christ could no more be brought, into doubt by honest histori¬ 
cal evidence than could the assassination of C?esar, the great 
historian shed tears. The resurrection of Christ is an impreg¬ 
nable rock upon which is builded the superstructure of Chris- 



THE PROBLEM OF CHRISTOLOGY. 


45 


tianity, and all the waves of skepticism will never be able to 
move this solid foundation. 

Comparative theology has become one of the most interest¬ 
ing sciences of the present age; and Christology is the most in¬ 
teresting department of comparative theology. It furnishes us 
with new arguments in favor of the divine origin of Christian¬ 
ity. While other religions have been ethnic and incomplete, 
Christianity is universal and possesses a fullness of life. Com¬ 
parative theology clearly teaches that Christianity is adapted 
to all races, and will become the universal religion. This new 
science also teaches that this fullness of life found in Chris¬ 
tianity is derived from its Founder. The Christ of the Bible 
towers above the founders of other religions as a great moun¬ 
tain towers above the sea. 

Christ has been compared to Socrates. Socrates was more 
of a philosopher than a religious teacher. Still, he taught the¬ 
ism and a future state, and his philosophy was a preparation 
for Christianity. In comparing him with Jesus of Nazareth, 
we present the following facts: (1) The work of Socrates was 
local, while that of Jesus was universal. (2) Socrates did not 
commence his teaching until middle life, Jesus commenced at 
the age of thirty. (3) Socrates taught nearly forty years, 
Jesus taught only three years and a half. (4) Socrates lived 
in the most intellectual city in the world and visited at the great 
centers of culture, Jesus lived in the despised town of Nazareth 
and among an illiterate people. (5) Socrates made mistakes, 
but Jesus made none. ITis enemies could not, find a flaw in 
either his life or teachings. His ideals for the spiritual eleva¬ 
tion of man were certainly beyond the powers of the greatest- 
genius to invent. It was a long time before even his own dis¬ 
ciples could understand the spiritual and universal character of 
his kingdom. 

Christ has been compared to Mohammed; but it must be 
remembered that nearly everything that is good in Mohamme¬ 
danism has been borrowed from Judaism and Christianity, 
When, however, we compare Mohammed with Christ, we find 
a marvelous contrast: (1) With Mohammed God was a despot ; 


46 


MAC ROCOSM US. 


with Christ he was a Father. (2) Mohammed taught a most 
extreme fatalism; Christ taught that all could come to the ba¬ 
ther. (3) Mohammed taught polygamy and thus degraded 
woman; Christ taught monogamy, which has led to the elevation 
of the fair sex. (4) 'Mohammed made war on his enemies; 
Christ taught his disciples to love their enemies. (5) Moham¬ 
med taught a sensual paradise; Christ taught one of the purest 
spirituality. The tyrannical, fatalistic and sensualistic teach¬ 
ings of Mohammed are impeding the progress of civilization, 
while the sayings of Jesus continue to promote the highest civ¬ 
ilization. It seems that the Mohammedans are now sending 
missionaries to this countrv; but they will certainly not be able 
to do anything to advance civilization unless they adopt a 
higher standard than Mohammed taught* 

Christ has been compared to Buddha. As this subject has 
attracted so much attention since the appearance of Edwin Ar¬ 
nold’s “Light of Asia, 1 ' I will give considerable attention to it 
in concluding this chapter. 

There is quite a tendency of late, on the part of some wint¬ 
ers who claim a high culture, to depreciate Christianity in com¬ 
parison with the great ethnic religions of the world. Among 
the most prominent of these is the author o*f the “Light of 
Asia.” Dr. Wilkinson has severely criticised Mr. Edwin Ar- 
nold's poem, and has certainly shown that it is by no means a 
first-class poem. If Mr. Arnold could represent the plowman 
in the days of Gautauna as riding on his plow as the farmer 
does in the last half of the nineteenth century, it is not surpris¬ 
ing that he should apply the Christian civilization of the pres¬ 
ent age to the days of Buddha, the great light of Asia. 

Buddhism in its forms very much resembles Romanism. A 
Catholic missionary among the Chinese once said: “There is 
not a piece of dress, not a sacerdotal function, not a ceremony 
of the court of Rome, which the devil has not copied in this 
country.” The poor, ignorant man did not seem to know that 
the Chinese religion is much older than Roman Catholicism. 
The Buddhist priests practiced celibacy, monasticism, the holv 
water, the worship of saints and relics, long before the origin 


THE PROBLEM OF C JIRISTOLOGY. 


47 


cl the Roman Church. 1 here was once in India a shrine to 
the tooth of Buddha, hut it was in *311 A. I), 'moved to Cevloo 

t • • t/ y 

where it is now universally worshiped. It is said that in Cey¬ 
lon the left collar bone of Buddha is also worshiped. This 
shows almost as much superstition as kissing the pope’s great 
toe. As Buddhism is much older than Romanism, it does look 
as if the Romanists have been great imitators. 

While Buddhism in form resembles Romanism, in spirit it 
is Protestant. 1 he human mind in Asia seems to have undei 
gone an experience which resembles the Protestant Reforma 
lion. Buddhism was a protest in the interest of people against 
the oppressions of the priesthood of Brahmanism. Brahman¬ 
ism relied upon caste; Buddhism insisted upon personal charac¬ 
ter as essential to salvation. Buddhism was a great missionary 
religion, and sent its apostles into all parts of Asia. Like Chris 
tianitv, it specially relied upon teaching. It much resembles 
Protestantism in contrast with Romanism in this particular. 

'There iias been much discussion in reference to the doctri¬ 
nal tendency of Buddhism. Some leading writers claim that it 
is atheistic and denies immortality. I do not really think that 
such is the case; but it certainly went to a great extreme in its 
reaction against Brahmanism. It is a good illustration of the 
tendency of the human mind to extremes. Brahmanism taught 
an extreme spiritualism; and Buddhism an extreme individual¬ 
ism. Brahmanism largely lost morality, and Buddhism spirit¬ 
uality. Buddhism was a grand system of morals, and in that 
way greatly benefited the world. Its first five commandments 
are as follows: (1) Do not kill; (2) do not steal; (3) do not 
commit adultery; (4) do not lie; (5) do not become intoxi¬ 
cated. I can not think that atheism and the doctrine of eternal 
death would have much in them to stimulate men to such vir¬ 
tues. Such a religion as Buddhism could not. exist in opposi¬ 
tion to God and immortality. Nirvana is the great object of 
life with the Buddhist ; and such happiness certainly can not be 
attained to in annihilation. The doctrine of transmigration 
as taught by the Buddhist shows to my mind that Buddhism 
expects a future life; for if the soul is not immortal, there 


48 


MAOKOCOSMUS. 


could be no soul to transmigrate. While Buddhism is not. suffi 
eiently explicit on theism and the doctrine of a future state, 
this is a very different thing from entirely denying their exist¬ 
ence. 

.Near the end of the seventh century B. C. there reigned in 
northern India, about one hundred miles north of Benares, a 
good king by the name of Kapilavaster. He was among the 
last of the great Solar race so much celebrated in the ancient 
epics of India. Ilis wife was named Maya, because of her won¬ 
drous beauty; and at the age of forty-five she became the 
mother of a young prince called Gautama, who afterwards 
became Buddha. From his clan he was called Gautama. The 
name Buddha is his official title*, because lie is a great enlight¬ 
ener of mankind. 

Gautama had four visions, which caused him to become a 
hermit. In his first, he thought that he was driving through 
the eastern gate of the city to his park, and met an old, decrepit 
man. When he thought what age brought upon man, he re¬ 
turned to his palace without enjoying the pleasures of the park. 
In his second vision he was driving through the southern gate 
to his pleasure garden, and met a sick man. When he reflected 
what disease does for man, he immediately returned home. At 
another time he was driving through the western gate to his 
pleasure gardens, and met a funeral procession. On reflect¬ 
ing upon the certainty of death, ho again drove back to his 
palace. In his fourth vision he was driving through the north¬ 
ern gate to his pleasure gardens, and met a mendicant. On 
thinking of the self-abnegation of those who renounce the pleas¬ 
ures of the world and try to conquer themselves, lie commanded 
his coachman to return immediately to the palace. Gautama 
determined to become an anchorite. He left the palace one 
night and declared that, he would never return until he 
had attained to a knowledge of the divine law, and thus 
become Buddha. Edwin Arnold thus describes the scene of 
parting; 




THE PROBLEM. OK CI1RISTOLOGY. 


49 


“So with his brow he touched her feet, and bent 
The farewell of fond eyes, unutterable, 

Upon her sleeping face, still wet with tears. 

And thrice around the bed in reverence, 

As though it were an altar, softly stepped 
With clasped hands laid upon his beating heart, 

‘For never,’ spake he, ‘lie I there again!’ 

And thrice he made to go, but thrice came back. 

So strong her beauty was, so large his love: 

Then, o’er his head drawing his cloth, he turned. 

And raised the Purdah’s edge.” 

Thus Gautama parted with his lovely wife and child and 
became a mendicant. He encountered the evil trod Mara, who 
tried to turn him back; but he was fully resolved to spend his 
life in search for the truth. He spent six years in fasting and 
self-mortification; and his self-control Avas such that he gained 
great fame, and gathered many disciples about him. Finally 
the religious side of his nature triumphed, and he felt assured 
that he had found the truth. He immediately renounced pen¬ 
ances, declaring that there was no good in them, and proclaimed 

that salvation Avas to be obtained bv self-control and lo’Ve. He 

•/ 

had become Buddha, and Avas ready to enlighten the world. 
He Avas a preacher of righteousness, and sent his disciples to 
preach a new life to the nations. Buddhism is distinguished 
from all other religions preceding Christianity by its intensely 
missionary spirit. The disciples of Confucius never attempted 
to make proselytes outside of China. Brahminism has always 
been confined within the bounds of India. The doctrines of 
Zoroaster were strict!v Persian. The religion of Egypt, was com- 
fined to the vallevs of the Hile. The religions of Greece and 

tJ 

Roane Avere national religions. Even Judaism Avas strictly a 
national religion. Such, however, Avas not the case Avith Bud¬ 
dhism; for the disciples of Buddha were desirous of bringing 
all nations under the influence of the truth they proclaimed. 
They have even been considering the propriety of sending mis¬ 
sionaries to America. 

Buddhism contains much truth, and was doubtless a prep¬ 
aration for Christianity. Christianity did not come to destroy 

t/ t. V 


MACROCOSMUS. 


50 

the truths contained in preceding religions, but to fulfill. I 
will now, for a short time, call your attention to the contrast 
between Buddha and Christ, but it will not then be difficult for 
you to see the infinite superiority of Christianity to Buddhism. 

(1) Buddha was the son of a king; Christ was the son 
of a carpenter. (2) Buddha was born in a palace ; Christ was 
born in a manger. (3) Buddha was brought up amid the 
splendors of a court; Christ was brought up in Nazareth, a de¬ 
spised village of Galilee. (4) Buddha became a hermit in or¬ 
der to get rid of his sins and attain to the truth ; Christ had 
no sin, and needed no repentance. (5) Buddha changed his 
mind on the question of a hermit life; Christ never changed 
his views. From the beginning, everything that Jesus said 
and did, had on it the imprint of perfection. (6) Buddha 
only claimed to bo a learner; Christ was the great Teacher. 
( 7) Buddha seemed to hesitate in reference to his words and 
actions; Christ never hesitated upcn any of ihc Great problems 
of the day. (8) Buddha appeared to approach everything 
from below; Christ, from above. (9) Buddha was so indefinite 
in his statements about God that some great critics have even 
pronounced him an atheist; Christ preached in his Father’s 
name, and claimed that it was the object of his mission to 
establish upon this earth the kingdom of God. (10) Buddha 
had so little to sa.v about the future state, that some critics have 
claimed that he did not believe in a future state at all; Christ 
constantly spoke of the joys of the unseen world. In fact, the 
unseen universe was as much a reality to him as the seen. If 
Buddha was the light of Asia, Christ is the light of the world, 
and the light of Asia is only moonlight compared to the merid¬ 
ian glorv of the Sun of righteousness. 

I think the fact is fully established that Christology is not, 

onlv a science, but the greatest, of historical sciences. It affords 

new evidence of the truth of Christianity by showing not only 

the perfect character of its Founder, but by also showing that 

the universal character of Christianitv is derived from the uni- 

• ■ 

versal spirit of the Christ. The Christ of the Bible is the 
Christ of history. 


CHAPTER V. 

The Problems of Revelation and Inspiration. 

Revelation in its widest signification, is any species of knowl 
edge of which God is the ultimate source. Jt includes all that 
belongs to ethics and natural religion. In the earlv history 
of the church the comprehensive use of the term was more com¬ 
mon than at the present time. The early defenders of Chris¬ 
tianity had to vindicate it against polytheism. This naturally 
led them to defend the unity of God, and the principles of nat¬ 
ural religion in general. When, however, polytheism ceased 
to be a foe., and deism took its place, there was of necessity a 
change in the method of defense. The deist admitted the 
claims of natural religion, and opposed himself to Christianity. 
The work of the apologist was, then, to show the necessity oi 
a revealed religion. 

REVELATION AND INSPIRATION. 

A failure to distinguish between revelation and inspiration 
has led to great confusion. Revelation discloses new truth 
that is inaccessible to the human mind; inspiration is more 
of the nature of superintendence. A man to whom a revelation 
is given is also inspired to express it; yet a man may be inspired 
and not reveal anything new. A large portion of the Bible is 
of the first kind. Jonathan Edwards makes the following dis- 
tinction: “We ought to make a distinction between those things 
which were written in the sacred hooks by the immediate inspi¬ 
ration of the Holy Spirit, and those things which were commit¬ 
ted to writing by the direction of the Holy Spirit.’’ 

Theophany was one of God's methods of revelation. Dr. 
C. A. Briggs thus writes on the subject: “It is personal con¬ 
tact with God in theophany and with Christ in Christophany 
that marks the highest order of prophecy in the Scriptures. Tt 
is the Divine Spirit who came upon men, entered into them 
and guided them in their self-conscious condition, enabling’ them 
to use all the endowments of their nature in the conception 

51 


52 


MACROCOSMUS. 


aiul then in the expression of the truth of God. Such personal 
contact with God is described in the Old Testament in the his¬ 
tory of Moses, Samuel, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah and Ezekiel, 
and in the Eew Testament in the history of the twelve apostles 
and of Paul. The prophet of God is assured by the personal 
presence of God in theophany or by the conscious presence of 
the Divine Spirit within him, that he is commissioned to de¬ 
clare the truth of God which he sees and conceives.” 

God Revealed Ilis Will to Man by the High Priest with 
Uri'm and Thummim. “And thou shalt put in the breastplate 
of judgment the Urim and the Thummim; and they shall be 
upon Aaron’s heart, when he goet.h in before the Lord; and 
Aaron shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel upon 
his heart before the Lord continually” (Ex. xxviii. 30). “And 
when Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not. 
neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets” (I. Sam. 
xxviii. 6). 

The Typology of the Bible Teaches a Divine Revelation. 
The word “type” is derived from a Greek word which means 
to strike. It is the impression produced by a blow. It is used 
in John xx. 25, where Thomas savs: “Unless I shall see in 
his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the 
print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not 
believe.” It also denotes the model set before us for our imi¬ 
tation. In Phil. iii. 17 the apostles are made an example, or 
a type, for all Christians. 

The Old Testament types are shadows of good things to 
come. In Col. ii. 16, 17 Paul says: “Let no man judge you 
in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holvday, or of the 
new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things 
to come, but the body is of Christ,” In Ileb. x. 1 we have 
the following language: “For the law having a shadow of good 
things to come, and not the very image of the things, can 
never with those sacrifices which tliev offer year by year con- 
tinually make the comers thereunto perfect.” 

From the Scripture before us it is quite evident that nearly 
all the religious rites and ceremonies of the Old Testament 


THE PROBLEMS OF REVELATION AND INSPIRATION. 


53 


Avere types pointing forward to tlieir antitypes in the New 
1 estanient. J he Jewish tabernacle, with, its furniture, gives 
us in type a complete outline of the ivliole scheme of redemp¬ 
tion. \\ e can safely say that the gospel was preached in type 
under the Old .Testament dispensations; but it could not, of 
course, be preached in fact until after the development of its 
facts. 

The typological evidence of a divine revelation is, to my 
'mind, very convincing. No one could make a shoe to lit the 
human foot who did not knoiv something of the construction 
of the foot. It is very evident that no one could have set up 
these types who did not understand the nature and character 
of the antitype. God alone could have such knowledge, and 
they must consequently be of divine origin. See the author's 
“Cultura.” 

The Prophecy of the Bible Proves a Divine Revelation. It 
is certain that the prophets of the Bible claimed a revelation 
from God on the question of the future. It is also very evi¬ 
dent, that the writers of the Xew Testament believed that God 
revealed his will to the prophets of the Old Testament. The 
prophetic evidence of divine revelation is very convincing, for 
Ave can read upon the pages of history the fulfillment of these 
plain pred ictions. 

In God’s natural gifts to man Ave haA^e hints of prophetic 
power beyond. There are tAvo ways by which man tries to 
penetrate the mysteries of the future: (1) By mathematical 
calculation. The stability of the laAvs of nature are such that 
the calculations of the astronomer are very correct in case God 
does not intervene by his own direct poAver. We can not help 
admiring the wonderful endowments Avhich God has bestowed 
upon man, and the greatness of the Author of nature, aaIio has 
■made the AA r hole system so accurate in its movements. (2) 
Human sagacity. It is astonishing what poAver some men have 
of looking into the future. It is one of the principal causes 
cf the success of business men, and it shoAvs the greatness of 
true statesmanship. We admire these things, but they are far 
from the prophetic gift., Avhich is certainly a direct gift from 


54 


MACROCOSM US. 


God. No candid student of Bible prophecies can otherwise 
than believe that holy men of old spake as they were moved 
by the Holy Spirit. 

When we study carefully the races of mankind, we can net 
fail to be impressed with the fact that the father of the post¬ 


diluvian world had a divine revelation in reference to the des¬ 
tiny of his sons (Gen. ix. 25-27). Thomas Paine once declared 
that, if God had prophets, we should eixpect them to speak in 
language that could be understood. The student of ethnology 
has no difficulty in understanding the language of Noah. The 
descendants of Ham have been the slaves of the world; the 
descendants of Shem have given the world its religion; and 
the descendants of Japheth have been the political rulers of the 
world. The Hamites were not slaves for centuries after the 
prediction of Noah. At one time they disputed even with 
Rome the empire of the world. The prophecy, however, has 
been literally fulfilled. Alexander took Tyre, Rome conquered 
Carthage, and the Hamites became the servants of Japheth. 
as they had been of Sliem when the land of Canaan was con¬ 
quered. Since then Africa has ever been noted as the land 

of slaves, and these slaves have been transported to' different 

parts of the world. We rejoice to know, however, that there 
are indications that the slave trade will come to an end, and 
dark Africa receive the light of modern civilization. The pre¬ 
dictions concerning Sliem and Japheth have been as fully ful¬ 
filled. the descendants of Japheth are now disseminating 
that religion which came through the posterity of Sliem. The 
political triumphs of the Indo-European races in all parts of 

the world show that the descendants of Japheth are literally 

dwelling in the tents of Shem. 

r 

A thousand years after the prophecy concerning the sons 
of Noah, an angel prophet announced to TIaga.r the destiny of 
her offspring (Gen. xvi. 10-12). The descendants of Tshmael 
are to this day, in harmony with the prophecy, wild and mighty. 
They possess that character wherever you find them. Tliev 
have ever dwelt in the presence of their brethren and escaped 
all foreign yokes. Neither the armies of Egypt, Persia nor 


THE PROBLEMS OF REY r ELATION AND INSPIRATION. 


00 


Koine were able to subdue them. To this day even the Sultan 
of lurkey, their nominal ruler, is compelled to pay them a 
yeaily tax to obtain the privilege of transporting his caravans 
o\er the plains to Mecca. I hey yet possess territory equal in 
extent to that of Koine in her palmy days. We can not ac¬ 
count for these tacts without admitting that the angel prophet 
actually spoke to Haga.r. 

( xod Spake to Man by 11 is Son. Moses predicted a prophet 
greater than himself who would complete divine revelation. 
Of all God’s prophets in the Old Testament, none were to be 
compared to Moses, The antitype of Moses in the. New Testa¬ 
ment Fulfilled the old covenant and established a new one upon 
still higher principles. He, was in constant communion 
with his father in heaven, and predicted his own death and 
resurrection. He was a prophet in a higher sense than Moses 
in the fact that he not only possessed the Holy Spirit himself, 
but bestowed it upon his apostles and made them prophets. 
God revealed himself to us in Christ. John says: “No man 
hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is 
in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him” (John i. 
18—R. V., marg.). The Son reveals the Father; the visible 
Christ reveals the invisible God. We have in Christ a knowl¬ 
edge of God expressed in the terms of humanity. The very 
essence of God is revealed in Christ. God is light, God is 
Spirit, God is love. Life and immortality were fully brought 
to light in the mission of the Son of God. Jesus, in his teach¬ 
ing, in his works, in his resurrection, showed that he was truly 
God manifested in the flesh. 


Inspiration is Not Consecration. When the Holy Spirit 
inspires a person, it does not necessarily sanctify him; its pur¬ 
pose is to convey truth. Balaam and Caiaphas were inspired, 
but they were far from being consecrated men. This shows 
that inspiration is designed for the impartation of truth, and it 
is distinct from sanctification. 

Inspiration is Not Omniscience. The Holy Spirit does not 
impart all truth to the inspired person, but only a portion of 
it. It is principally religions truth, and only secular truth 



56 


MACROCOSMUS. 


so far as it is necessary to the importation of religious truth. 
The knowledge of a person inspired may be more limited on 
many subjects than is the knowledge of those not inspired. On 
many points the Greeks and Romans were far more intellec¬ 
tual than were the inspired writers of the Bible. Even on 
questions of inspiration, some inspired men had more knowl¬ 
edge than others. The doctrine of the incarnation is at first 
only disclosed so far as the promise of the seed of the woman. 
This is a very different thing from its enlargement, as pre¬ 
sented by the prophet Isaiah. It is not surprising that he is 
called the evangelical prophet. The fifty-third chapter of Isa¬ 
iah gives a very graphic picture of the death, burial and resur¬ 
rection of our Saviour. It was the means of converting a noted 
English skeptic to a full belief in the divinity of our Lord. 

Inspiration is Personal. It is only in a secondary sense 
that wo can speak of the Bible as inspired. It is composed of 
manv books, and certainlv contains the writings of manv in- 
spired men. There is not a book in the Bible which I would 
be willing to have rejected from the canon; but we can not 
speak of the canon as inspired. I fully believe that every 
book in the Bible contains revealed truth; but still we must 
remember that inspiration specially pertains to persons and 
not to books. While this is true, it is still a fact, that the 
truth which the Bible contains would not have been revealed as 
it has been, if no Bible had come into existence. Even the 
greatest prophets in Israel were influenced by the previous 
history and prophecy of the nation. Even Christ and his 
apostles were greatly influenced by the sacred writings of the 
Jewish nation. 

Inspiration Has Special Reference to Religious Truth. The 
revelation which accounts for the books of the Bible was a his¬ 
torical process of the self-disclosure of God as the Redeemer 
of 'man, and this culminated in the Christ. The inspiration 
which accounts for these books was an inward spiritual move¬ 
ment corresponding to the revelation, and which purified and 
elevated the thoughts and feelings of the people possessing this 
revelation. While I am not willing to admit errors in the 


THE PROBLEMS OF REVELATION AND INSPIRATION. 


r' 

5 1 


original autographs of the sacred Scriptures, still 1 well know 
that the inspired writers were greatly limited in their knowl¬ 
edge of secular affairs. The Bible was given to teach us how 
to go to heaven, and not how the heavens go; still I believe 
that if we had the original autographs of the sacred books, that 
where they incidentally speak on scientific subjects they speak 
the truth. A true philosopher has no great difficulty in har¬ 
monizing the Bible, as we now have it, with modern science, 
and if we had the original autographs, I feel fully satisfied 
that we would find them errorless. The farther back we go, 
the fewer errors we find, and if we could go back to the foun¬ 
tain-head, we would doubtless find it perfectly pure. 

Revelation and Inspiration Are in Harmony with the Law 
of Evolution. Xew truth comes into the world that is old, and 
all truth must conform to certain historical conditions. In the 
early history of the race, religious as well as all other truth 
must be adapted to the period of childhood. For this reason 
we have the patriarchal .dispensation preceding the national 
dispensation of the Israelites. The national religion of Israel 
was necessary in order to prepare the world for a universal 
religion. Qui* Saviour was a true evolutionist when he said, 
“First the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear.” 
Revelation and inspiration were exactly adapted to each dis¬ 
pensation. Christ and his apostles did not claim perfection 
for the old covenant, or there would have been no place for 
the new; while they found fault with it for their own agei, it 
was certainly adapted to the age for which it was given. God 
in sundry times and in divers manners spake unto the fathers 
by the prophets; but in the fullness of time, when the world 
was ready for the great, event, he spake by his Son. It took 
a long time for the world to be prepared for a full revelation 
of God in his own Son. God is now in Christ reconciling the 
world unto himself. The God-man Jesus Christ is the exact 
image of the Father. 


CHAPTER VI. 
The Problem of Evil. 


This is certainly a difficult problem, but I do’ not regard 
it altogether as inexplicable. In the study of the problem, we 
should remember that there is something else in the world be¬ 
sides evil. On this point history is liable to mislead us, for it 
largely dwells upon war and upon those things that bring mis¬ 
fortunes upon the race. It does not dwell upon the happy 
homes that have existed from time almost immemorial. The 
majority of individuals have always been comparatively happy, 
and but few could be found who would pronounce life a fail¬ 
ure. 

While the terms Egyptian, Assyrian and Hindoo carry to 
most minds the ideas of barbarism, it is evident that they 
reached a very high civilization. Language itself is sufficient 
evidence of this fact. The Sanscrit, the old Hindoo language, 
has fifty letters, and in its grammar it is considered the most 
perfect, language in the world. It has an extensive litera¬ 
ture, which is of great interest to the scholar even at the pres¬ 
ent time. It shows great advancement in culture and happi¬ 
ness. The following prayer of the Persian poet Sadi is wor¬ 
thy of most careful attention bv every grateful and true heart: 
“O God, have mercy upon the wicked; for thou hast done 
everything for the good in making them good.” 

Leibnitz, in his Theodicee, presents some interesting 
thoughts on the problem of evil. The following is suggestive: 
“It may lie that certain particular evils are bound up with what 
is best in general.” Pope’s line is interesting, “All partial 
evil, universal good.” This is true optimism, but Voltaire re¬ 
plies to it as follows: “A singular notion of universal good— 
composed of the stone, of the gout, of all crimes, of all suffer¬ 
ings, of death, and damnation.” You will usually find an in¬ 
fidel a pessimist, and a true Christian an optimist. When wo 
study carefully the system to which evil belongs we can not 


THE PROBLEM OF EVIL. 


59 

^ee liotw it could have been otherwise than that evil would 
he incident to the system. God made man a free moral agent, 
and the possibility of going wrong seems to be a necessary part 
of free agency. That man can reach a. point in spiritual cul¬ 
ture in which he will not. go wrong is evident, and this seems 
to be the divine purpose in the training of the race. So 
far as we know, this may have been true in the training 
of the inhabitants of other worlds. The fact that the angels 
desired to look into the scheme of redemption seems to imply 
that they had had an experience that made them specially 
interested. 

In our efforts to solve the problem of evil, we must consider 
carefully the following facts: 

1. The system in which evil exists is a creation. It was 
not at the beginning; but as soon as God created free moral 
agents, evil was a possibility. Some one will say that man 
should have been so constituted that he could not sin; but then 
we would have had a machine and not a man. The possibility 
of good would have been destroyed as well as the possibility of 
evil. Good is more powerful than evil, and it is our mission to 
overcome evil with good. I do not agree with the pessimist 
that it would have been better for man not to have been created 
at all. God has an important mission for man in his great uni¬ 
verse, and even those who go wrong can not prevent the general 
advancement of the race. 

2. As the system in which evil exists is a creation, this im¬ 
plies that it has limitation. That which is created can neither 
be infinite nor omnipotent. Every created intelligence must 
have a beginning, and this implies limitation. The law of its 
action is growth, development, progress. While man in his en¬ 
vironment is greatly limited, this is really for his good, for God 
intends him to grow. When we study him from the standpoint 
of nature, we find that lie has wonderful possibilities; but from 
the standpoint of revelation his possibilities are much greater. 
It does not vet apnea,r what we shall be; but we know if we do 
our duty we are sons of God, and are every day becoming more 
and more assimilated to the character of God. There is noth- 


60 


MACROCOSM US. 


ing in our limitations here to prevent our final entrance into the 

city of God. 

«/ 

3. In all limitation, there is necessarily imperfection. Man 
is not, perfect in his physical organization, but with his environ¬ 
ment we can not see how it could be otherwise- Lhe human 
skin is not perfect, and can be penetrated with a bullet; but we 
could not get along in this world without it. I he lungs are not 
perfect, nor the air we breathe; but both are essential to the 
life of man in this world. Fire is ever destructive in its nature, 
but we could not do without fire. God intends our progress by 
the use of things in this world that, are not perfect. We find, 
even in the mind of man, imperfection. Human knowledge is 
imperfect, and this is the reason why man can make progress. 
The will and conscience of man are imperfect, and this is why 
God sent into the world a teacher with a perfect will and a per¬ 
fect conscience. 

4. God intends the present system for the education of man 
for a still higher system. Evil is incidental to the present, and 
in the nature of things we do not see how it could be otherwise. 
There are such things as inherent, natural impossibilities. It 
is impossible for matter to exist without occupying space; and 
this is not, a question of God’s power, but that, which is inherent 
in the very nature of things. In the very nature of things, two 
mountains could not exist, without a. valley between them. You 
had as well ask the question why God could not make two and 
two five, a.s to ask the question why God could not make a free 
moral agent without the possibility of his going wrong. The 
very statement of man’s free agency implies the possibility of 
doing wrong. The power to do right carries with it the power 
to do wrong. 

Some one may ask the question, Will not man’s free agency 
enable him to go wrong, even after he reaches a higher system ( 
1 answer that the object of the present system is to so educate 
him that, he will not go wrong. He would, of course, have the 
ability to do so, but not the inclination. The will of the Christ 
was so perfect that the tempter could not. influence him to do 
wrong. When man reaches the heavenly kingdom, lie will be 

CD 7 


I 


THE PKOBLEM OF EVIL. 


61 


so far advanced in spiritual culture that he will not be inclined 
to do wrong. Besides, the last enemy will be subdued, and be 
will be beyond temptation. This view of the problem certainly 
makes partial evil incidental to universal good. When man 
gains the victory over his spiritual enemies, be will rejoice in 
the fact that God thought him worthy to go through the great 
conflict. 

Those who live in willful disobedience to God must suffer 
the consequences of their sins. It is claimed that God will not 
punish man forever for the sins committed in this life. It must 
be remembered that punishment is the result of sin. The enor¬ 
mity of a crime is not determined by the length of time it took 
to commit it. In five minutes, a man may commit a deed which 
will destroy his prospects, at least so far as this world is con¬ 
cerned. It did not take Thomas Paine long to write his “Age 
of Reason/’ but it will not be known until the judgment-day the 
evil it has done. In fact, all the effects of men’s crimes can not 
be known until then; and this shows the necessity of a general 
judgment, when all will be judged according to the deeds done 
in the bodv. If a man so live here as to attain to eternal life, 
it looks reasonable that he can live in such a way as to fail in 
obtaining it. 

Nature as well as revelation teaches that as a man sows he 
will also reap. Julius Muller, the great German theologian 
truly says : “Such is the constitution of things that unwillingness 
to goodness may ripen into eternal voluntary opposition to it.” 
Even Omnipotence could not make a soul happy that had lost 
all desire to be holy. Both nature and revelation plainly teach 
that character tends to become permanently good or perma¬ 
nently bad. Willful disobedience to truth tends to make a per¬ 
son dislike it. This tendency can continue until the person 
rejoices in iniquity instead of rejoicing in the truth 

“The mills of God grind slowly; 

But they grind exceeding small.” 

The Greek philosophers were right when they affirmed that 
there can be no happiness without holiness. Confucius declared 
that heaven means principle. Sin renders morally blind its pos- 


62 


MACROCOSM US. 


sessors, so it is not surprising that the truth is entirely un¬ 
pleasant to some persons. Shakespeare well understood this. 
Macbeth thus speaks: 

“Come, seeling night, 

Skarf of the tender eye of pitiful day; 

And, with thy bloody and invisible hand, 

Cancel, and tear to pieces, that great bond 
Which keeps me pale!—Light thickens; and the crow 
Makes wing to the rooky wood.” 

Sin becomes in itself a force; and, like certain diseases, be¬ 
comes chronic. It may be perpetuated forever, and its effects 
can properly be described as eternal punishment. In fact, our 
Saviour teaches the possibility of the eternity of sin. Turn to 
Mark iii. 29, and you will find that he who sins against the 
Holy Spirit is in danger of eternal sin. We have here the 
Greek liamartematos, and not kriseos, and liamartematos cer¬ 
tainly means eternal sin. I now turn to the Revised Version, 
and find this language: “But whosoever shall blaspheme against 
the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eter¬ 
nal sin.” 

In Matt. xxv. we have taught the second coming of Christ, 
the judgment, the eternal punishment, of the wicked, and the 
eternal life of the righteous. The Greek word aionion, which 
expresses the duration of the life of the righteous, is the same 
word that is used to express the duration of the punishment, of 

the wicked. The root of aionion is aei, which means always. 

* «/ 

Aidios, which even Universalists admit denotes eternal, is from 
the same root. 

It is a law of language that antithetical expressions are 
equal in extent, but the opposite in character. This should, 
then, forever settle the question. Please read Math xxv. 46: 
“And these shall go away into eternal punishment; but the 
righteous into eternal life.” If there is no such thing as eter¬ 
nal punishment, our Saviour certainly made a mistake. This 
wo can not admit for a moment; so we believe in the doctrine 
of eternal punishment as the necessary consequence of eternal 


THE PROBLEM OF EVIL. 


63 


In Rev. xx. 10 we have the expression, “tormented day and 
night for ever and ever,’ which is the duplicate of aion, and it 
is nowhere limited in the New Testament. The same expres¬ 
sion is found in Rev. xiv. 11: “The smoke of their torment 
ascendeth up lor ever and ever." If it is possible for language 
to teach eternal punishment as the consequence of eternal sin, 
it is certainly taught in the New Testament. 

Whether the wicked after the judgment-day will continue 
forever in a state of consciousness is a question we can not de¬ 
termine. The Bible clearly teaches that they are in a conscious 
state between death and the resurrection; but there is really 


nothing definite in reference to their state after the resurrec¬ 
tion. It is certain that destruction does not mean annihilation ; 
but unconsciousness would not necessarily mean annihilation. 
Eternal death is the penalty for eternal sin; and eternal death 
may result in the complete inertness of all the forces of sin. 

There has been a. good deal of discussion of the question of 
the personality of Satan. It is evident that the Bible attributes 
personality to Satan; but what does this mean ? It is probable 
that it is a name which generalizes bad spirits. Davenport, one 
of the greatest of the New England Fathers, uses the following 
language: “What is the devil?—The multitude of apostate an¬ 
gels which, by pride, and blasphemy against God, and malice 
against man, became liars and murderers, by tempting him to 
that sin. 7 ’ 

The use of the term “principalities” in the Bible, in refer¬ 
ence to the kingdom of evil, seems- to imply that the evil spirits 
are organized under the general term “Satan," or adversary. 
The position here presented harmonizes with the organic force 
of evil in this world. It is only organized in opposition to good, 
and would not make a chief of its own that it would not soon 
dethrone. It is not at all probable that the organic force of evil 
would set up one chief as forever supreme over all the rest. 
This is against the analogy of evil which is opposed to all 

1 oval tv. 

«> 


We have a. good example in the Bible of this general use of 
personality in reference to- the organization of evil forces. Paul 


64 


MACROCOSM US. 


speaks of “the man of sin,” and “antichrist.” These names 
are evidently used in a general sense, and have no reference to 
any particular person. The forces of evil designated “the man 
of sin,” had begun to work in the days of Paul. The designa¬ 
tion, “the man of sin,” certainly includes all men and women 
through whom evil spirits and evil forces are working to corrupt 
Christianity and to obstruct the progress of the kingdom of God. 
Dr. Horace Bushneill truly says: “Antichrist is, in fact, the 
devil of Christianity, as Satan is the devil of creation and provi¬ 
dence.” With this view of the subject, we can understand 
what Christ means when he says, “I beheld Satan as lightning 
fall from heaven.” 

We learn in the last book of the Bible the fate of Satan will 
be the same as that of the beast and false prophet. All opposing 
forces must give way, and the kingdom of God become entirely 
victorious over the heavens and earth most glorious. 

I have no special theory on the question of future punish¬ 
ment. I have only been giving suggestions towards the solu¬ 
tion of the problem of evil. I fully believe in the doctrine of 
everlasting punishment as taught by Christ and his apostles. I t 


must be that eternal sin carries with it eternal consequences. 
Everlasting punishment is certain, but we are unable to say ex 
actly what it will be. Sin is a terrible thing, and the Bible wri¬ 
ters, in what they say about future punishment, seem to have 
in view the purpose of impressing upon the minds of the people 
the great sinfulness of sin. It is sin that gives man all his trou¬ 


ble, and if he will forsake his sins, the question of punishment 
need give him no trouble. Jesus said : “You will not come unto 
me that you might have life.” The important thing for man to 
do is to come to Christ and obtain eternal life. Please remem¬ 
ber that I do not deny eternal consciousness on the part of the 
wicked. 


CHAPTER YII. 

The Problem of Unbelief. 

The greatest sin in this world is the sin of unbelief. Our 
Saviour sent the Holy Spirit into this world to convince it of 
sin, because it believed not on him. 


CAUSES OF UNBELIEF. 


1. Scientific. Science means classified knowledge, but spec¬ 
ulation, even among those who call themselves scientists, fre¬ 
quently takes the place of real knowledge. True science is a 
support to revelation, but mere speculation frequently tends to 


unbelief. There is also' a tendency on the part of specialists 
to think that all knowledge is comprehended in their narrow 
circle. They are inclined to view everything from the narrow 
standpoint of their own investigation. If their department 
pertains entirely to material things, there is a. great tendency 
on their part to become materialists. That, is the reason why 
we find so many materialists among physicists. 

The doctrine of evolution has led many into skepticism. I 
do not say that the doctrine is altogether to blame for it. The 
extreme positions to which many of its opponents have been 
driven has been productive of fully as much unbelief. Evolu¬ 
tion for a long time was largely confined to physical science, and 
there can be no question in reference to its tendency to mate¬ 
rialism. Its advocates were specialists in the physical sciences, 
and as a rule they were largely unacquainted with philosophy. 
When philosophical and religious teachers gave their attention 
to the question of evolution, they soon lifted it above the ma¬ 
terialistic tendency to which the physicists had degraded it. 
Evolution in the future will be a support to true religion 
instead of being an ally of infidelity. 

2. Philosophical. Philosophy has in the past had extreme 
tendencies. Even before the Christian era, it tended on the one 
hand to materialism and on the other to pantheism. The Epi¬ 
cureans were materialists, and the Stoics were pantheists. Tt is 

65 


66 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


really interesting to observe the dependence of modem materi¬ 
alists upon Epicurus and Lucretius. While it lias been produc¬ 
tive of much skepticism, it is really difficult to- find anything 
new in modern materialism. 

The French and the German philosophers in modern times 
have shown a tendency, on the one hand, to' materialism, and, 
on the other, to pantheism. French materialism during the 
Revolution went into atheism itself. In fact, it made the na¬ 
tion very largely infidel, and it had much to do with the horrors 
of the Revolution. It was certainly an object-lesson to the na¬ 
tions of the ruinous effects of infidelity upon society. German 
pantheism has been almost as ruinous in its tendency. At one 
time it made Germany very largely a nation of skeptics. Even 
the German pulpits were filled by ministers of a skeptical turn 
of mind. It appeared that everything the Reformation had 
done would be undone. The universities were captured by the 
skeptics, and, on account of their great reputation, the seed of 
infidelity was sown world-wide. Every civilized country was 
to some extent affected by the rationalism of Germany. In God’s 
providence, philosophical and religious teachers were brought 
up in Germany itself, who were fully prepared to meet these 
rationalists upon their own grounds. Meander, Lotze and oth¬ 
ers were more than 'matches for their opponents, and skepticism 
has largely expended its force in Germany. 

3. Social. Social agitation is inevitable among a liberty- 

loving people, and it frequently does much good. The United 

States, with its free constitution, is a happier and much safer 

government than Russia under the iron heel of despotism. 

Protestantism, with its conflicting sects, is preferable to the 

uniformity of Rome. 

•/ 

There is no necessary connection between the principles of 
political freedom and unbelief. Christianity is really the great¬ 
est support that liberty has ever had. The chief advocates of 
civil liberty under the reigns of the Charleses were the Puritans, 
the most earnest Christians of that age. It is a fact, however, 
that great social and political agitation has frequently been con¬ 
nected with infidelity. There is no better illustration of this 


the pkoblem: of unbelief. 


67 


than tJie French Revolution. The abuses in both Church and 
State prepared the soil for infidel principles. Voltaire and the 
Encyclopaedists sowed the seed of skepticism with an unsparing 
hand. Christianity was identified with an apostate church, and 
was, of course, rejected with it. The French nation suffered 
somewhat like a farmer who dams up a stream. It is arbitra¬ 
rily checked in its course, and finally bursts all barriers, and 
sweeps everything before it. Like the stream, if it had been 
wisely guided, the principles of liberty advocated by the people 
could have been made the means of greatly advancing civiliza¬ 
tion in France. 

The advocates of civil liberty, who hold to infidel opinions, 
are apt to produce much skepticism. For example, the “Rights 
of Man,” by Tom Paine, prepared many readers for “The Age 
of Reason.” Many advocates of social reform, in both Europe 
and America, are pronounced infidels, and the people who accept 
their reform ideas are also apt to fall in with their skeptical 
principles. It is very necessary that all social reforms should 
be entirely divorced from infidelity. I am fully satisfied that 
no social reform can accomplish much when it is entirely di¬ 
vorced from a pure religion. 

4. Ethical. The causes of infidelity are more ethical than 
intellectual. It is very difficult to convince a 'man of a truth 
he does not want to believe. Even the existence of God depends, 
not upon demonstrative, but upon moral certainty. This gives 
the skeptic his opportunity; lienee the fool says in his heart that 
there is no God. While the evidence of Christianity is very 
convincing, and almost amounts to demonstration, still there is 
an opportunity for doubt on the part of one who so desires. The 
reason why the sin of unbelief is so great is the fact that it 
shows a very depraved condition of heart, “There is light 
enough,” says Pascal, “for those who sincerely wish to see; and 
darkness enough for those of an opposite description.” It is 
certain that the will has much to do with skepticism, whether it 
be materialism or spiritualism. Many in our day reject the 
evidence of miracles for no other reason than that they are so in¬ 
clined. In such cases the wish biases the judgment, and it is 


08 


MACROCOSM US. 


seldom the case that a man believes to be true wliat he wishes to 
be falsa 

5. Religious. The corruptions of Christianity have led 
many into infidelity. Of course, the best things in this world 
are liable to be perverted. We have no reason to suppose that 
Christianity would be an exception. In fact, there were cor¬ 
rupting tendencies even in the days of Paul. The great apostle 
predicted the rise of the man of sin, who would sit in the temple 
of God, and claim for himself divine attributes. The man of 
sin largely caused the Trench Revolution and all the infidelity 
connected with it Some of the unreasonable positions taken 
by Protestants have been productive of much skepticism. 

Religious intolerance has also been productive of much un¬ 
belief. While our Saviour himself was the most tolerant of 
beings, evil men have so perverted the Christian religion as to 
make it the means of oppressing others. When the true theory 
of astronomy was discovered by Copernicus, Kepler and others, 
the Vatican thundered its anathemas against all who held to the 
new doctrine. Milton says that Galileo was sent to the dunr 
geons of the Inquisition for thinking in astronomy otherwise 
than the Franciscan and Dominican licensers thought Thus 
the astronomy which gives us such enlarged conceptions of the 
God of nature, and we regard as in perfect harmony with reve¬ 
lation, had for a long time to bear the brand of heresy. Re¬ 
ligious intolerance has not been confined alone to Catholics. 
Protestantism has also dipped its garments into the blood of 
persecution. The treatment of the Nonconformists in England 
is a good illustration of this fact. Even the Puritans, who were 
persecuted in England, persecuted others upon our New Eng¬ 
land shores. The intolerant spirit of those who have claimed 
to be Christians has been productive of much unbelief. Secta¬ 
rianism has certainly produced its share of infidels. Its spirit 
is directly antipodal to the spirit of the gospel. This spirit can 
not otherwise than lead many persons into skepticism. Secta¬ 
rianism also confuses persons, and thus leads some into skepti¬ 
cism. The people do not know what to believe when all kinds 
of doctrines are preached by all kinds of men. The unitv for 


THE PROBLEM OF UNBELIEF. 


69 

which Christ prayed would soon counteract these dangerous ten¬ 
dencies. Jesus prayed for the unity of his disciples, that the 
world might believe that God had sent him. The unity and 
spirit of the apostolic church would soon convert the world to 
Christ. It would enable the church to use such a powerful 
force in mission fields that the pagan nations would be rap¬ 
idly enlightened. The kingdoms of this world would soon be¬ 
come the kingdom of our Lord and his Christ, and he would 
reign for ever and ever. 

SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM. 

1. A proper study oif the Bible will solve the problem of 
unbelief for any person. Insectiverous critics magnify ap¬ 
parent mistakes beyond bounds, and many of a skeptical turn 
only read these mistakes. What they need is a thorough knowl¬ 
edge of the Bible. The critics have never been able to' find any 
serious fault with the central figure of the Bible. The Jehovah 
of the Old Testament is the Lord and Saviour of the New. The 
religion founded by the Christ of the New has been in the 
world nineteen hundred years., and it has proved itself by its 
fruits to be of divine origin. It convicts men of sin, but when 
it has the spirit of its Master, no one can convict it of sin. 

The Bible is certainly a marvelous book. Westcott says: 
“Revelation is not a vain thing for us. It is our life,” Our 
Saviour shows that the Old Testament is filled with things 
concerning himself. The New Testament is largely veiled in 
the Old, and the Old is revealed in the New. Jesus said : 
“Search the scriptures, for they are they which testify of me.” 
Jesus fully believed in the writings of Moses. “If ye believe 
not Moses’ writings, how shall ye believe my words ?” It is 
certainly the work of a simpleton to let dust gather on the lids 
of the Bible, and then denounce the Book. Search the Scrip¬ 
tures, and find in them eternal life. 

You will be interested in the antiquity of a part of the 
Book. It contains the oldest and most interesting history in 
the world. Its history will go far towards solving the problem 
of unbelief. A careful st.udv of the shadow and the substance. 


7-0 


MACROCOSMUS. 


of the type and the antitype, of the prophecy and its fulfill¬ 
ment of the mysterious person to whom all point, will convince 
any honest skeptic. The Book itself is a miracle, and you can 
not account for it without God. Think of this book; it em¬ 
braces the whole destiny of the race, and covers the whole 
period of time. It commences with Genesis, and ends with 
man’s eternal destiny. 

If the literary man will give proper attention to the Bible, 
it will solve for him the problem of unbelief. As a literary 
work, the Bible has no peer in this world. Intellectually, it 
is far superior to anything else that has ever been produced. 
It is the only book for the soul, and the best book for the mind. 
Even Voltaire himself admitted that the Book of Ruth is su¬ 
perior in many respects to Homer or any other classic writer. 
The Book of Job is acknowledged by the most eminent critics 
to be the greatest literary work in the world. The reader will 
find more on this subject in my work “Cultura.” 

The Bible is the bulwark of liberty and civilization. When 
General Garibaldi was congratulated on securing liberty for 
Italy, he said: “It is the Bible that has freed Italy.” In refer- 
ring to the first French republic, Lamartine said: “The repub¬ 
lic, without a God, was quickly stranded.” Liberty, equality 
and fraternity, disconnected from citizenship, lead to license, 
lawlessness and passion. Xothing will banish infidelity so 
soon from the human heart as an honest studv of the Bible. 

t J 

2. The study of Christology soon solves the problem of un¬ 
belief. In speaking of the Christ, Renan says: “All history 
is incomprehensible without him.” Strauss says: “As little 
as humanity will be without religion, as little will it be with¬ 
out Christ.” Christianity, which has revolutionized societv, 
was not established upon chance or myth; it was established 
upon the Rock of Ages. It has something definite in it. Paul 
says: “I know whom I believed.” Dr. Noah Porter says: 
“Christianity is more than history. It is also a system of 
truths. Every event which its history records, either is a truth, 
or suggests a truth, or expresses a truth, which a man needs 
to assent to or to put into practice.” Christianity has, succeeded 


THE PROBLEM OF UNBELIEF. 


71 


because of the divinity of its. author. Richter thus speaks • 
“Jesus is the purest among the mighty, and the mightiest 
among the pure, who, with his pierced hands, has raised up 
empires from their foundations, turned the stream of history 
from its old channel, and still continues to rule and guide the 
ages. 7 ’ 

3. A better understanding of the adaptation of Christianity 
to the wants of society will go a long ways towards solving the 
problem of unbelief. Some writers seem to think that Chris¬ 
tianity is opposed to all pleasures. This is certainly a great 
mistake, for Christianity is designed to give the greatest pleas¬ 
ure. It is only opposed to sinful pleasures. The hermit’s life 
does not correspond to the spirit of Christianity. The austere 
mien of some professed Christians is opposed to true Christian 
joy. The pleasures of sin will destroy any man or woman, and 
to these pleasures Christianity is properly opposed. It is also 
claimed by thoughtless writers that Christianity and business 
are not in harmony. ’ This is altogether incorrect, for Chris¬ 
tianity teaches diligence in business. Christianity wisely con¬ 
demns the miser, for there is nothing that will more completely 
shrivel the soul than the spirit of mammonism. You can not 
serve God and mammon. The business man greatly needs 
the inspiration of joy and hope peculiar to' Christianity, to 
counteract the many perplexities of business life. 

.V proper understanding of what Christianity has done for 
woman should convince any thoughtful person of its divine 
claims. The position of woman among pagan nations, and her 
position among Christian nations, is all the difference between 
night and day. Christianity honors the passive virtues, and 
these are possessed in the highest perfection by woman,. Woman 
was a slave when not a plaything among pagans; among Chris¬ 
tians, she is the counterpart of man. 

4. Christianity saves the individual from his sins, and this 

•J ' 

proves its divine nature. I have never known a person to live 
a Christian life, and regret it at the hour of death. Christian¬ 
ity makes a bad man a good one. I have known men who were 

•V 

a terror to the people of the community where they lived, and 


72 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


these men were brought under tlie influence of Christianity, 
and there was a complete change in their moral character. 
Changing Saul of Tarsus to Paul the apostle was like changing 
the current of a mighty river. Saul of Tarsus was a fiery per¬ 
secutor. Paul the apostle was the most tender and patient of 
men. If all persons would become sincere Christians, it would 
not be long until society would be comparatively perfect. If 
the skeptic knew more of the influence of Christianity upon the 
lives of men, he would be slower in his opposition to this great 
spiritual force for the elevation of man. 

5. A better knowledge of the relation of the supernatural 
to the natural would throw much light upon the problem of un¬ 
belief. It is certain that the system of nature itself is not suf¬ 
ficient to meet the demands of man’s religious nature. A rev¬ 
elation from God is absolutely necessary to meet this demand. 
The aberrations of conscience clearly show that even this 'moral 

t j 

guide in man’s constitution is not sufficient without a revela¬ 
tion. Revelation is to conscience what the telescope is to the 
astronomer. While the system of nature certainly declares the 
glory of God, it requires a revelation to fully acquaint man with 
the very essence of Jehovah. God’s revelation through his Son 
gives man a knowledge of the purpose of the ages. 

Opposition to miracles appears to be the greatest prop to 
unbelief in this age of the world. This appears strange, for a 
denial of miracles would lead to the rejection of all religions; 
in fact, carried put to its ultimate result, leads to atheism; for 
it is scarcely possible to conceive of the existence of God, and 
banish him entirely from the affairs of the universe. To those 
who believe in the existence of God, miracles appear as natural 
things. Miracles are often an intensification of natural forces, 
and a help in the government of the universe. 

God himself is the great miracle. When we fully recognize 
him as the great ruler of this universe, all difficulties in refer¬ 
ence to the miraculous will soon be banished from our minds. 
A miracle is not a breach in nature, but a supernatural inter¬ 
ruption of the unnatural. The operation of the lower forces 
do not at all exclude the interference of the higher. 


THE PROBLEM OF UXBELIEF. 


f7*> 

i O 


Christianity manifests to the world an historical illustra¬ 
tion of the supernatural. !Sin would long since have driven the 
world to ruin, had not God interfered in the interest of man. 


The student of the Bible well knows that Revelation itself is 
progressive, and that the miracles wrought were against the 
unnatural, and were adapted to the purpose of advancing God’s 
moral and spiritual kingdom in this world. Jean Paul Richter 
truly says that miracles upon earth are nature in heaven. 

Christ is the central figure in the historical development of 
the supernatural. He inaugurates a new era. When we study 
carefully his character, all the miracles he wrought appear most 
natural. Even his resurrection, the greatest miracle accom¬ 
plished in his person, is exactly what we would expect of him. 
It was not possible that the holy One should see corruption. 
All the miracles of the Bible refer either directly or indirectly 
to the great central miracle, and they show that God’s purpose 
was to give mankind a perfect rule of faith and practice. In 
biology we learn that in the. production of life there is some¬ 
thing beyond the ordinary, but when the new being is born, 
the extraordinary gives way to the usual laws of life. The 
same thing is true in God’s spiritual kingdom. We find the 
extraordinary when necessary; but when the ordinary is suf¬ 
ficient, there is no manifestation of the miraculous. God reigns 
victorious over the heavens and earth most glorious. 


CHAPTER VIII. 

The Problem of a Future State. 

All persons who think at all must be interested in the great 
question of a future state. Life is short, and man can not help 
thinking’ of his destiny at the consummation of the present 
state of existence. All light that can be thrown upon this sub¬ 
ject is of interest, no difference whence it is derived. I do not. 
design in the present chapter to call attention to the Biblical 
evidence, but only to the scientific and philosophical evidence 
in support of the Biblical doctrine of a future state. 


THE VISIBLE UNIVERSE. 

It is now a well-established fact in science that the visible 
universe had a beginning. If it be all there is, then the law 
of continuity, of which scientists have so much to say, has been 
broken. If, however, the visible universe be only a small por¬ 
tion of the dominion of the Infinite, then the invisible universe 
may account for the existence of the visible, and the law of 
continuity be preserved. 

Science not only teaches the origin of the visible universe 
from the invisible, but it also teaches that the visible universe 
will come to an end. 


All worldly shapes shall melt in gloom, 

The sun himself shall die, 

Before this mortal shall assume 
His immortality. 

— Campbell. 


There is going on in the visible universe a. constant dissi¬ 
pation of energy, and the time must come when it will be ex¬ 
hausted. Man may remain in the material universe a long 
time, but the great catastrophe must ultimately come. Our 
system is rapidly spending its very life and energy, and even 
the great sun himself is growing cold. This is true of the entire 
visible universe; and if man is destined anywhere to find an 
eternal home, it must, be in the invisible universe. 

74 


T1IE PROBLEM OF A FUTURE STATE. 


*7 V 

i O 

The facts before us lead us to conclude that the visible uni¬ 
verse is connected with the invisible by bonds of energy, and 
that the invisible is capable of receiving this energy and trans¬ 
forming’ it. Man is, therefore, by certain organs connected to 
the invisible universe, and the present state is only preparatory 
to an eternal state. \\ ithout this conclusion we not only vio- 

* c/ 

late the law of continuity, but we charge the Creator with con¬ 
summate folly in bringing into existence an order without pur¬ 
pose and forever sinking it into the shades of annihilation. But 
this can not be the case, for the order and adaptation in the 
visible universe forbid it. Man will continue to live amid the 
war of elements, the wreck of matter, and the crush of worlds. 
Eternal process moving on: 

From state to state the spirit walks, 

And these are but the shattered stalks, 

Or ruined crysalis of one. 

— Tennyson. 

THE CONSERVATION OF ENERGY. 

It is now the position of the greatest scientific thinkers that 
something besides matter in the universe has objective reality. 
Light, heat, magnetism, and, in fact, all the forces of nature, 
have objective reality as well as the matter or stuff of the uni¬ 
verse. We believe in the objective reality of matter, because 
it is an experimental truth that it can neither be increased nor 
diminished in quantity. Lor this reason, Stewart and Tail, in 
their work on “The Unseen Universe/’ use the expression “con¬ 
servation of matter.” 

As we must admit the objective reality of matter, we are 
forced to admit the reality of whatever may in the same sense 

•J *j 

be conserved. It is an experimental fact that the laws of con¬ 
servation can also be applied to the forces of nature, and we 
must, therefore, conclude that the forces of nature have object¬ 
ive reality. Scientists are fond of using the terms “matter” 
and “energy,” and in them comprehend everything. Matter 
is inert, and it 'must depend upon energy for its movements. 
That which causes its movements can not, then, be less real 
than the matter moved. 


76 


MACROCOSMUS. 


We are now at liberty to apply this law of the conservation 
of energy to the mind itself, and insist upon its existence as a 
reality in the unseen universe. The mind of man connes in 
contact with the material universe to the extent that memory 
treasures up the facts. When the visible universe has become 
defunct, and its energy has passed into the unseen, the unseen 
universe will be full of energy, and free to exercise its func¬ 
tions, retaining its hold upon the past through the faculty of 
memory, and continuing its existence as a conscious entity. 

“Vital spark of heavenly flame, 

Quit, oh quit, this mortal frame! 

Oh, the pain, the bliss of dying! 

Cease; fond nature, cease thy strife, 

And let me languish into life! 

“Hark! they whisper—angels say, 

‘Sister spirit, come away!’ 

What is this absorbs me quite, 

Steals my senses, shuts my sight, 

Drowns my spirits, draws my breath; 

Tell me, my soul, can this be death?” 

MANS WORK IN THIS WORLD UNFINISHED. 

In the material world we find perfect order. Beauty and 
harmony are strikingly apparent in all parts of the material 
universe. Everything seems to be ill its place, and accomplish¬ 
ing the end for which it was designed. In the solar system 
the attraction of gravitation is reversely in proportion to the 
square of the distance; and the squares of the periodic times 
of the planets’ revolutions around the sun are exactly propor¬ 
tionate to the cubes of their distances. Throughout the great 
system everything works in perfect harmony, and nothing is 
permitted to interfere with the beneficial influence of the dif¬ 
ferent bodies. Tf this were not the case, the svstem of nature 
would be thrown into confusion, and the inhabitants of the 
would be deprived of their enjoyments. 

If we studv carefully the arrangements connected with the 

nJ O 

earth alone, we find the same order, and positive evidence that 
all was designed to promote the welfare of rational beings. 


THE PROBLEM OF A FUTURE STATE. 


77 


The composition of the atmosphere is such as to adapt it to the 
Jungs; and any change in its present composition would be dis¬ 
astrous to all life upon this planet. The same thing can he 
said in reference to the composition of water and the inhabit¬ 
ants of the briny deep. The position of the mountain ranges 
and the water-courses shows how systematically everything is 
arranged in the material world. 

Before the invention of the microscope and telescope it 
might have been contended that all beyond the range of the 
human eye was confusion. But these instruments enable us 
to know that such is not the case. Even in the eye of the mi¬ 
nutest insect the polished globules are so arranged as to attract 
the attention and admiration of all investigators in this depart¬ 
ment of science. The telescope has revealed the same order 
beyond the range of the natural eye that we find in the solar 
system. With the facts before us, we are safe in concluding 
that there is perfect order and system in the material world, 
and that all was designed to promote the happiness of intelli¬ 
gent beings. When, however, we study the moral world, we 
find that all this is reversed. Nation has dashed against na¬ 
tion, and the earth has been deluged with human blood. If 
we could picture the scenes of sufferings and bloodshed con¬ 
nected with the rise and fall of the great eastern monarchies, 
it would be sufficient to make even a demon blush. The proud 
and haughty Xerxes leads forth two or three millions of men 
to be slaughtered by the heroic Greeks. Alexander, fired with 
ambition and a desire to avenge his country’s wrongs upon the 
Persian Empire, led his victorious armies through Asia., and 
built up a mighty empire upon the dead bodies of slaughtered 
millions. The same spirit finally made Borne the mistress of 
the world, but she ruled the nations by the sword. Space will 
not permit me to speak of Alaric, the Gothic monster ; of Attila, 
the fierce Hun; of the wars of Napoleon the First, and of the 
many modern conflicts which have disgraced the nations. It 
is evident that in the past man has been governed more by his 
combativeness and destructiveness than by those high moral 
principles which God has placed in his nature to guide him. 


78 


MACEOCOSMUS. 


He lias perverted to evil that freedom which the Creator gave 
him for his own good. If this life were all, it would appear 
that the Creator's purpose in the moral world has been de¬ 
feated. But when we consider this world as only a small part 
of the great plan of God’s moral system, we can see how the 
future life will remedy the present imperfections in the moral 
system. We are also enabled to see in the providential govern¬ 
ment. of this world how God makes even the wrath of man 
praise him, and has so utilized the movements of mankind as 
to advance civilization. 

It is evident that there is progress on the part of humanity, 
and that the mind of man, unperverted, tends to intellectual 
and moral perfection. There really seems to be no limits to 
the excursions of intellect, and man is constantly making new 
discoveries in the creat system of nature. Death soon over- 
takes him in his progress, and his work is left unfinished. The 
great Newton felt that in the world of discovery and progress 
he had been only a schoolboy gathering up shells on the sea¬ 
shore, while the great ocean of truth lay undiscovered before 
him. The same thing is true with men engaged in works of 
benevolence. Just when they feel best qualified for their great 
work, it is cut short by the swift messenger—death. As God 
has so constituted the human mind that it can tend to intellec¬ 
tual and moral perfection, it must be that there is a future 
state where the great powers of man can be more fully unfolded. 

Some day Love shall claim his own; 

Some day right ascend his throne; 

Some day hidden Truth be known; 

Some day—some sweet day. 

—Lewis J. Bates. 

THE SUBSTANTIAL NATURE OF THE SPIRIT OF MAN. 

Plato, in his “Phaedon,” discusses the question as to 
whether the relation of the soul to the body is that of harmony 
to a harp, or of a rower to a boat. Plato and his school be¬ 
lieved in the doctrine of immortality, and Greek literature is 
full of it. Modern science has made plain the position of the 
great Greek philosopher, and it clearly shows that the spirit 


f 


THE PROBLEM OF A FUTURE STATE. 


79 


of man is something mope than simply harmony to a harp. 
Beale, Helmholtz and Lotze have placed scientific facts before 
the world which are of immense value on this question. Even 
Professor Huxley admits that life is the cause of organization, 
and not organization the cause of life. The cause must exist 
before the effect, and it certainly may exist also after it. The 
musician lives before the music lie produces, and he may also 
live after it. The boat may be destroyed, and the rower live. 
So the body may go to dust, and the spirit return to God who 
gave it. 

The spirit of man is an immaterial substance having sub¬ 
sistence and life in itself. Dr. Carpenter, in his “Mental Phys¬ 
iology/’ claims that man has influential nerves, as well as those 
which are automatic. He is, then, something more than an 
automaton; he is a free moral agent. Science teaches that 
neither the automatic nor influential nerves can originate their 
own motion. There must, then, be back of them an agent which 
gives them action. This agent is an indestructible monad, if I 
may use this term; the substantial cause and essence of organi¬ 
zation, and the axis of all thought and action. Leibnitz, 
Goethe, and the greatest thinkers of the world, have advocated 
this doctrine. 

The facts of consciousness go to show that the spirit is an 
entity, and superior to material organization. The senses do 
not go beyond the phenomena of material bodies; but the mind 
takes cognizance of immaterial ratios, and presents ideas purely 
spiritual. It apprehends universals, genius and species, neces¬ 
sary truths and final cause. This is purely a spiritual action, 
and from its nature we must determine the character of the 
agent. The agent as spiritual is one of the indestructible® in 
nature, and must live after its separation from the body. 

It is the spirit, not the body, that continues man’s identity. 
In the common language of life, we recognize the spirit as the 
person proper. We talk as did Socrates when we speak of the 
different members of the body as belonging to us; but we recog¬ 
nize in the person proper something above these members. 
Even my brain belongs to me; but my personality is beyond my 


80 


MACROCOSM ITS. 


brain. Eerrier has shown that even if one lobe of the brain 
be entirely removed, it does not destroy mental action. The 
power with which man clings to his identity amid the changes 
the body is constantly undergoing, shows the superiority of 
personality itself to all material organization. We are not will¬ 
ing to sink our personality into that of another, no difference 
what may be the character of the other person. We hold on 
to personality even to death, and anticipate its continuance 
after death. If the crawling caterpillar can pass through its 
chrysalis state, and become a gorgeous butterfly, bathing its 
wings in the pure air of heaven, then man can surely pass 
through the valley of death, and arise to a life far more glorious 
than that of the butterflv. 

Life has been compared to the stars that fall, 

And death considered as ending all; 

But it is more like the star that sets, 

For it shall rise from death’s entangling nets. 


CONSCIENCE. 

Conscience clearly points to an immortal destiny for man. 
ITe lias interwoven in his constitution powers, principles and 
feelings which cause him to improve in virtue, and seek the 
welfare of others. The moral powers of man, like his intellec¬ 
tual, are capable of great improvement. Both ancient and 
modern history furnish us with striking examples of wonder¬ 
ful moral development on the part of man. They followed 
their conscientious convictions when subjected to the greatest 
torture. Even the most delicate women have suffered them¬ 
selves to be thrown to wild beasts, rather than sacrifice their 
convictions of right. Conscience, of course, has to be enlight¬ 
ened by intellectual culture ; but the way in which it clings f o 
the highest convictions certainly shows that it is related to the 
unseen universe. It does not tell us what, the right is; it simple 
deals with the intention and choice; and is that power of the 
mind by which we perceive and feel the right and wrong in 
the intention and the choice. When it is enlightened with the 
higher truth, it gives man the solar light, and his face may 


SI 


THE PROBLEM OF A FUTURE STATE. 

shine like that of an angel. Stephen is a striking example of 
a conscience that is very close to even the throne of God itself. 

Christianity has developed the greatest moral heroes, be¬ 
cause it is the highest truth ever revealed to man. Next to 
tho Master himself, Paul furnishes one of the best examples. 
He is an example of everything that is noble, heToic and benev¬ 
olent in human conduct. After he became a Christian, he 
spent the rest of his life in promoting the best interests of 'man¬ 
kind. T 'o accomplish his noble work, he parted with his friends 
and native country, and spent his life in preaching the gospel 
to the Gentiles. He suffered all kinds of persecutions, but did 
not let anything stand in the way of his great mission. The 
perils of robbers, of the sea, of the Gentiles, and even of his 
own countrymen, only stimulated him to greater energy in the 
prosecution of his noble work. He did not even shrink from 
the martyr’s crown, as he knew that God had laid up for him 
a crown of life in the eternal world. 

Howard is another example of benevolent enterprise on 
the part of a man fired with zeal for Christian work. He 
traveled over Europe in the prosecution of his benevolent work, 
and exposed himself to. all kinds of dangers. He went five 
times through Holland, four times through Germany, three 
times through France, twice through Italy, once through Spain, 
and traveled also through other countries, surveying everv- 
where the haunts of misery, and distributing benefits to man¬ 
kind wherever he appeared. In dungeons, jails and ^hospitals 
he spent most of his time, and he had great influence in bring¬ 
ing about, reformation in the management of these institutions. 

Prom realm to realm, with cross and crescent crown’d, 
Where’er mankind or misery are found, 

O’er burning sands, deep waves, or wilds of snow, 

Mild Howard journeying seeks the house of woe. 

Down many a winding step to dungeons dank, 

Where anguish wails aloud and fetters clank; 

To caves bestrewed with many a mouldering bone, 

And cells where echoes only learn to groan; 

Where no kind bars a whispering friend disclose, 

No sunbeam enters, and no zephyr blows— 


82 


MACROCOSMUS. 


He treads, inemulous of fame or wealth, 

Profuse of toil and prodigal of health; 

Leads stern-eyed Justice to the dark domains. 

If not to sever, to relax the chains; 

Gives to her babes, the self-devoted wife; 

To her fond husband, liberty and life. 

Onward he moves ! disease and death retire, 

And murmuring demons hate him and admire. 

— Darwin. 

We may look at conscience from another standpoint, and 
it equally points to the invisible world. Take, for example, 
those persons who had no> fear of punishment in this world, 
hut died with the most fearful forebodings of coming retribu¬ 
tion. According to Sir Thomas More, Richard III., who* mur¬ 
dered his royal nephews, was so tormented by conscience that 
he had no peace day or night. His dreams so disturbed him 
that he would rave throughout the night about his chamber like 
a madman. Charles IX., of France, is another example. He 
was induced to order the terrible massacre on St. Bartholomew, 

X ' 

when thousands of Protestants were butchered in cold bloody 
After that horrible night he had no peace of mind, but was 
the subject of great torments, both in mind and body. We 
learn from D’Aubigne that he would imagine through the 
night that he could hear groans similar to those heard on the 
night of the horrible massacre. The poet thus describes the 
condition of the mind under such circumstances: 

“Conscience, the torturer of the soul, unseen, 

Does fiercely brandish a sharp scourge within. 

Severe decrees may keep our tongues in awe, 

But to our thoughts what edict can give law! 

Even you yourself to your own breast shall tell 
Your crimes, and your own conscience be your hell.” 

Victor Hugo, in “Les Miserables,” gives a graphic descrip¬ 
tion of the power of conscience. Jean Yal Jean is the principal 
character in this noted work. He had escaped from the gal- 
levs, and become the mayor of a city. Another man, who 
looked like him, was tried and condemned in his place. Then 
came the struggle with conscience. Must he confess, and give 


THE PROBLEM OF A FUTURE STATE. 


83 


up all his benevolent enterprises, or let the innocent suffer! 
Conscience said, “Confessand he did confess. Hugo says: 
“Let us take nothing away from the human mind. Suppres¬ 
sion is evil. Certain faculties of man are directed towards 
the unknown. The unknown is an ocean. What isi conscience $ 
The compass of the unknown.” 

The dread of something after death— 

The undiscovered country, from whose bourne 
No traveler returns—puzzles the will; 

And makes us rather bear the ills we have 
Than fly to others that we know not of. 

Thus conscience doth make cowards of us all. 

— Hamlet. 












































































































































































. 




















































\ ; V-' | 












































Book II. 

THE GREATEST SOCIAL AND POLITICAL PROBLEMS 

OF THE AGE. 

CHAPTER I. 

The Labor Problem. 

• » 

SECTION I.-POLITICAL ECONOMY IN THE SOLUTION OP’ 

THE PROBLEM. 

The Creator has made no mistake in the laws governing the 
universe. His physical laws are all perfect, and each law is 
exactly adapted to the purpose for which it was given. There 
are natural laws governing society as well as the individual, 
and there is no conflict in these laws. What is good for society 
is really good for the individual. Writers in all stages of civ¬ 
ilization have had something to sav on economic questions; 
but political economy is comparatively a new science. 

A knowledge of economics is very*necessary in order to 
understand the great, social problems of the day. The foot¬ 
prints of Satan have always been visible in tha history of so¬ 
ciety ; and we should be careful to adopt those things which 
have made nations great and avoid those that have wrought 
ruin in the past. The honor which the Greeks paid to agricul¬ 
ture made them great; but their contempt for industry and the 
trades tended to their ultimate fuin. When the citizens of 
Athens relied upon state aid and refused to work, her down¬ 
ward tendency became very rapid. Aristotle, the greatest 
writer on economics in ancient times, warned the people 
against extremes, and insisted that the middle class is the sur¬ 
est basis of a good social organization. He considered a nation 
very unfortunate that had only rich and poor citizens, and 
warned his state against these tendencies. He considered a 
nation of farmers as safest and best. He really anticipated 



36 


MACROCOSMUS. 


Adam Smith in the distinction between value in use and value 
in exchange. Property, he declares, has two- uses, one natural, 
the other artificial. He also showed the. true value of money 
as an intermediate commodity designed to facilitate an ex¬ 
change of two other commodities. 


The violation of economic laws did much to bring ruin 
upon the Romans. Augustus condemned a senator to death 
for directing a workshop'. The commerce of Rome was carried 
on by conquered nations. Money, contrary to Aristotle, was 
considered the chief wealth, and its exportation was prohibited. 
Such writers as Juvenal, Seneca, Cato, Cicero and Pliny did 
much to stem the tide of corruption, but it was too strong for 
them. Cato and the agriculturists could not prevent the ruin 
of the small farmer. Pliny is certainly right when he declares 
that broad farms wrecked Italy. The perversion of wealth has 
been one of the greatest evils in all ages. 


THE BULLIOX THEORY. 

This theory originated among the Romans in direct contra¬ 
diction to the teaching of Aristotle. This great philosopher 
taught that money is only a.n instrument facilitating an ex¬ 
change; but the Roman writers, less acute than the great Greek, 
on perceiving that gold and silver were the money of all civ¬ 
ilized nations, fell into the mistake of regarding them as the 
only wealth. They did not seem to consider the fact that gold 
and silver are commodities; that they are bought and sold like 
other commodities, and owe their value to effort and desire just 
as do other commodities. 

There were two arguments which seemed to sustain the bul¬ 
lion theory, and they were satisfactory to the people. One 
was that money was always the measure of value. When the 
worth of a thing is desired, the answer is alwavs in money. 
They did not distinguish between value itself and the measure 
of value; and the fact that money, like other commodities, has 
value in itself created great confusion. The other argument 
used in favor of the bullion theory is the fact that money is 
the universal medium of exchange. 

C; 


THE LABOR PROBLEM. 


87 


These deceptive pillars were the only supports this false 

people, but also the best 
thinkers on the subject for nearly seventeen centuries. The 
result was that the nation adopted a commercial policy which 
greatly impeded the progress of civilization. As they looked 
upon gold and silver as the only wealth, they did all they could 
to keep it in the country. r J he nations passed laws strictly 
prohibiting the exportation of gold and silver. We learn from 
(. icero that this was repeatedly done at Rome. The nations of 
modern Europe passed similar laws. In the sixteenth century 
Spain became rich in the precious metals through their impor¬ 
tation from Mexico and Peru. She prohibited their exporta¬ 
tion to other countries, and thus obstructed the natural current 
of trade. This false policy brought on her commercial decay, 
and taught the nations that a countrv’s wealth does not consist 

v J t/ 

alone in the abundance of her gold and silver. 

THE MERCANTILE THEORY. 

This theory took its origin near the beginning of the seven¬ 
teenth century. It arose in this way: In the preceding century 
there was given to commerce a great impetus by the discovery of 
an ocean path to India and by a general waking up of enter¬ 
prise. The English merchants found that by taking gold and 
silver to India they could bring back articles worth more to 
England than the specie carried out; that by the imports 
brought in they could purchase more specie than they carried 
out. They therefore obtained leave of Parliament to export a 
limited amount of gold and silver. We learn from Adam Smith 
that the writers of that age compared it to the sowing of seed 
in order to reap a more abundant harvest. They did not venture 
to attack the bullion theory, for it was, then, one of the strong¬ 
holds of the enemy. A famous phrase at that time was a balance 
of trade; bv which was meant the value of the commodities 
exported over those imported. Each nation tried to have the 
exports greater than the imports, so that the difference would 
come back in gold and silver. The following were some of the 
expedients resorted to, and they greatly impeded the commerce 


88 


MACROCOSM US. 


of tlie world: (1) Each nation compelled her colonies to trade 
with her alone. Restrictions upon trade and unjust taxation 
brought on the American Revolutionary War. (2) Bounties 
were given to expert merchants to enable them to sell under 
their rivals in foreign markets. (3) The prohibition of the 
importation of goods that could be manufactured at home. (A) 
Special restrictions upon goods imported from countries where 
the balance of trade was considered unfavorable. * 

What folly it is for men to thus interfere with the natural 
laws which God has established for their good. If one nation 
is richer than another in some natural product, it is, of course, 
to its advantage to exchange its surplus with other nations for 
commodities that it needs. This is God’s law of exchange. 

i 

THE PHYSIOCRATS AND TIIE SINGLE-TAX THEORY. 

The Physiocrats were really the founders of modern political 
economy. They taught that agriculture was the only pursuit 
which added to the wealth of the country, and that additions 
to wealth must come from economic rent. They, therefore, 
advocated the doctrine that all other rents should be abolished, 
and all taxes levied on rent. M. Quesney was one of the great¬ 
est champions of this theory. lie seems to have misunderstood 
the nature of rent, and thought that wealth consists only in 
matter. The novelty of this theory seems, for a time, to have 
given it great reputation, and it numbered among its disciples 
the great financier Turgot, and the elder Mirabeau. Even 
Adam Smith was much under its influence ; but his practical 
Scotch sense caused him to see that it is not just to tax land 
alone. 

Mr. Henry George was one of the greatest advocates of this 
theory in recent times. I have taken great interest in reading 
his works, and he certainly teaches some very important truths. 
No one can doubt his sincerity or question the fact that he has 
done great good. I have had the pleasure of meeting him and 
hearing him lecture. Let us examine for a short time his the¬ 
ory; for while he teaches some important truths, it is very 
evident, to my mind that he has made some grave mistakes. We 


THE LABOR PROBLEM. 


89 


will, however, let him speak for himself. We now quote his own 
words from his own organ, the Standard: “The Standard ad¬ 


vocates the abolition of all taxes upon industry and the products 
of industry, and the taking by taxation upon land values, irre¬ 
spective of improvements, the annual rental value of all those 
various forms of natural opportunities, embraced under the 
general term ‘land.’ We hold that to tax labor or its products 
is to discourage industry.” 

I urge the following objections to the theory advocated by 
Mr. George: (1) It is only a theory, and a visionary one at 
that. (2) It is impractical and has never been made a success. 
It was a failure among the French, and was intimately asso¬ 
ciated with the French Revolution. (3) It is unjust to tax land 
value alone. (4) It would be difficult to separate pure economic 
rent of agricultural land from the annual value of the improve¬ 
ments on and in the land. (5) The conscience of the public 
would not submit to the confiscation of all the owners’ rent for 
taxes. (6) Mr. George calls the taxation of a man’s labor rob¬ 
bery. It is evident that land is of no value until labor and 

t j 

capital are applied to it; then, according to Mr. George’s theory, 
land value could not be taxed. (7) It is difficult to see how the 
taxation of land value alone could benefit the poor. It mighr 
be made the means of their oppression. (8) It would be oppres¬ 
sive to the farmer, who uses most land, to tax land value alone. 
(9) To tax land value alone would be to tax the poor man’s lot 
with a hut upon it, the same as the rich man’s with a palace 
upon it. (10) If you relieve the rich from all other taxes, they 
will appropriate all the valuable land and pay taxes upon it; 
for it is certainly true that the poor could not pay taxes upon 
valuable land. 


Graduated taxation, or even equal taxation, is, to my mind, 
a more excellent way. Professor Perry truly says: “The well- 
to-do citizens should, in the main, bear the burdens of govern¬ 
ment.” It is certainly true that the rich depend upon society 
for what they have. Society is, then, a silent partner; and is, 
as Professor Huxley says, entitled to a portion of the income. 
If the State can require a man to give up his life for its defense. 


( J0 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


it can certainly take that portion of liis property which may be 
necessary to promote the general welfare. If there was gradu¬ 
ated taxation, the burdens would mainly fall on the rich, 
whereas they now largely fall upon the poorer classes. Sonne 
States tax collateral inheritances; and it would be better, where 
there is no will, for all such to go to the State. If you are not 
compelled by law to support your cousin in poverty, there is no 
reason why you should inherit his property, in case he has no 
nearer relatives, unless he leaves it to you by will. He owes 
more to society than he owes to you, and society should be his 
heir. 

SECTION II.-THE CAPITALIST IN THE SOLUTION OF THE 

PROBLEM. 

Private property is not wrong in itself, for God constituted 
man to acquire. Combativeness lias been perverted, and it lias 
led to deadly strife ; but its perversion only goes to prove that 
it has a. legitimate use. The same thing can be said of acquisi¬ 
tiveness. It is designed for good, and becomes an evil only 
when perverted from its intended use. The abolition of private 
property has always been a failure, and it lias tended to destroy 
true manhood, from the fact that God intends man to acquire. 
The capitalist can do something towards solving the labor prob¬ 
lem in tho following ways: 

O *y 

1. He should regard the laborer as his brother, and remember 
that he is his brother’s keeper. lie should be willing to let him 
live as well as live himself; and if he appropriates an improper 
amount to himself, and lets others suffer, he is totally unworthy 
of respect. Xo man is ever fit for a civilized country who does 
not recognize the brotherhood of man. 

2. Tho capitalist should remember that society is his silent 
partner, and that ho has no moral right to appropriate to him¬ 
self that which is necessary to advance the interest of society. 
Mr. Gladstone thinks it is a sin for a man to hold a large 
amount of property and not use it for the good of society. Mr. 
Andrew Carnegie, a 'man of great wealth and a. friend of Mr. 
Gladstone, says in the March number of the Nineteenth Century 


THE LABOll PEOBLEM. 


91 


(1891); “The millionaire business man rates his vocation 
higher than 1, who sees in it the best or highest, or even the 
desirable, career for his son. The sons of the wealthy have a 
right instinct which tells them not to engage in work where the 
primary object is gain, for it is unworthy of those who, relieved 
from the necessities of earning a livelihood, are in a position to 
devote themselves to any of the hundred pursuits in which their 
time and knowledge can be employed primarily for the good of 
the community.” He holds that surplus wealth should be con¬ 
sidered as a sacred trust to be administered, by those into- whose 
hands it falls, during their lives for the good of society. He 
thinks that the time will soon come when those who do not thus 
dispose of their wealth will die disgraced. Mr. Carnegie seems 
to be disposing of his surplus wealth. 

3. The capitalist should be willing to share the profit of the 
business with those who help earn it. In fact, the names “capi¬ 
talist” and “laborer” should disappear, and all should have an 
interest in the business. Co-operation and profit-sharing are 
just, and I believe that they are natural laws in the business 
world, and that they will ultimately triumph. Then every man 
will be rewarded according to his true value. 


The capitalist should remember that he owns nothing abso¬ 
lutely. In case of war, the State can even conscript him; and 
it can, of course, use his property when the public good abso¬ 
lutely requires it. That being the case, how foolish it is for a 
man to make a hog of himself, and try to appropriate every¬ 
thing. The miser has been compared to the hog, and the com¬ 
parison is a good one. The hog is omnivorous and voracious, so 
is the miser. The hog only benefits the world when dead, and 
the same thing is true of the miser. The miser ruins himself 
and lays up ruin for his heirs. 

5. God will judge a man for the way in which he uses the 
property he is able to acquire. In Luke xii. 15-21, our Saviour 
gives a graphic description of the fate of a man who had 
become covetous and was not rich towards God. He is called 
a fool, and those who do not desire this title had better beware 


of covetousness. 


92 


MACROCOSMUS. 


SECTION III.-THE LABORER IN THE SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM. 

One of the most important things in education is to teach 
the student how to make a living. The laborer can do much in 
solving the problem. Let him appreciate especially the follow¬ 
ing in reference to' the importance of self-help: (1) The laborer 
should always retain his self-respect. Money does not neces¬ 
sarily make the man, and it frequently ruins him when he has 
been made. Never bow simply to money, for it is the meanest 
of masters. The loss of self-respect is one of the greatest evils 
of pauperism. (2) The laborer should learn what he can do 
best, and do it with his might. Many fail in the battle of life 
because they undertake that for which they are not suited. (3) 
All persons should have a high ideal in life, and work to it* Let 
each one remember that God intends him to fulfill a mission in 
this life that can be accomplished by no other person. To all 
the children of toil, I say, look upward. (4) Let all be indus¬ 
trious; for idleness is a sin against God and man. Paul teaches 
that if a man will not work, neither shall he eat. (5) Economy 
is important to all, if they expect to succeed in the battle of 
life. Many become paupers because they do not save when they 
have an opportunity. (6) Self-respect is essential to success. 
The use of alcoholic drinks is one of the greatest causes of pau¬ 
perism in this country. The sooner the liquor traffic is sup¬ 
pressed, the better it will be for the. general welfare of the 
country. (7) Labor organizations can be made effectual for 
good, if they are properly managed. If the laborers are pru¬ 
dent, they will obtain their rights without bloody revolution; 
for they are in the majority and their votes will count. They . 
can triumph at the ballot-box and convince capitalists that they 
are something more than machines. 

SECTION IV.-CHRISTIANITY IN THE SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM. 

When Christianity was introduced in the Homan Empire, 
a large portion of the most intellectual men of the world were 
slaves. Tts influence upon social conditions might be compared 
to the spring sun upon the cold, icy mountains. There was no 
sudden revolution, but, gradually, Christianity accomplished 


THE LABOR PROBLEM. 


93 


its work. All leading writers upon economics will admit the 
correctness of the argument we have presented, and it might 
be used, as a strong argument in favor of the divine origin of 
Christianity. The following principles of Christianity tend to 
the solution of the labor problem: (1) Christianity teaches the 
fatherhood of God. (2) It teaches the universal brotherhood of. 
man. Those who properly recognize these principles can not 
look upon labor as simply a commodity. (3) The golden rule, 
if carried out, would unite labor and capital, and then the prob¬ 
lem would be solved. It would certainly lead to profit-sharing 
and co-operation; and then every man would be rewarded ac¬ 
cording to his work. A few would not get all the profits. (4) 
Christianity lifts men to a higher spiritual plane; and thus 
enables them to better adjust their relations. 

The Bible plainly teaches that no man who trusts in the 
wealth of this world can enter the kingdom of God. Of course, 
the man who gives all his time to acquiring the riches of this 
world does trust in uncertain riches. Writers on economics 
have much to say about the wealth of England. The capitalists 
do not know what to do with their income. They are like the 
rich fool of the Bible., who does not know what to do with his 
goods. The submerged tenth, so graphically described by Gen¬ 
eral Booth, shows what plutocracy has done for England. The 
pauperism of London and other cities is a companion picture 
to the wealth of England. While a few live as did Dives, 
many are living as did Lazarus. The teachers of the Bible 
should hurl God’s truth against the monstrous hogs of society. 
These avaricious human beings are as voracious as the hog, 
which will drive away others and appropriate everything to 
itself. Dives went to' perdition because of avarice; and mul¬ 
titudes of plutocrats will be lost because of their avarice. The 
golden mean between poverty and riches is what we should all 
seek. If a few appropriate everything to themselves, then others 
must suffer. Llood properly describes the results: 

“Work! Work! Work! 

My labor never flags; 

And what its wages? A bed of straw, 

A crust of bread—and rags; 


( J4 


MACROCOSMUS. 


That shattered roof, and this naked floor, 

A table, a broken chair, 

And a wall so blank, my shadow I thank 
For sometimes falling there!” 

SECTION V.-THE STATE IN THE SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM. 

That the State has an important work in the solution of tlie 
problem, no thinking person would, for a moment, question. 
False theories have, thus far, been in the way of its solution. 

THE PROTECTIVE THEORY. 

This theory has done much towards establishing a. moneyed 
aristocracy. The following arguments have been used in favor 
of the theory of protection: (1) That the young industries 
should be protected. (2) That protection is essential to- a uni¬ 
form market, (3) That it is essential to- national unity and 
completeness. (4) That it advances the general interest of 
society. (5) That it protects and elevates labor. 

Free trade among the States of the American Union is a 
refutation of the first argument. If the West and South do 
not need protection against the Forth and East, it is difficult to 
see why the United States, as a whole, needs protection against 
foreign countries. It is certainly true that protection is not 
essential to a. uniform market, but frequently prevents it. 
When an industry is protected, so many go into it that they 
glut the market, and bring on panic and disaster. Protection 
really has nothing to do with national unity, or the complete¬ 
ness of society. In order to do any good, it would have to 
protect the nation against ignorant and vicious foreigners in¬ 
stead of their products. The products of foreign nations will 
certainly do our country less harm than the pauper foreigners 
themselves. While we welcome foreigners, we are certainly not 
safe in receiving the criminals of European states. 

We can not see how protection can promote the general wel¬ 
fare of the people, for it is legislation in the interest of the 
few against the many. The effect of the McKinley Bill shows 
what the people think of it. Mr. McKinley before his death 
greatly modified his views. Nearly all the leading political 


THE LABOR PROBLEM. 


95 


economists are opposed, to protection, and only favor a revenue 
tariff. The claim of protectionists that protection is for the 
benefit of the laborer is one of their most, fallacious arguments. 
Protection places the money in the hands of manufacturers and 
renders the laborer helpless in the hands of his protected lord. 
The uprising of the agricultural class in this country shows 
which way the wind is blowing. Blaine’s reciprocity views 
show that even the party which lias championed the protection 
cause, is becoming tired of protection. Mr. McKinley was 
silent on the subject, and as President showed himself to be 
one of the greatest of Americans. While reciprocity under 
protection is partial, as those living nearest the country whose 
articles are free, would be most benefited, still, it is a move¬ 
ment in the right direction, and we will ultimately have uni¬ 
versal reciprocity. Future, generations will appreciate Mr. 
Blaine’s statesmanship much more than has the present,. He 
was evidently the greatest statesman of his day. The twentieth 
century will say so. 

I urge the following objections to the theory of protection: 
(1) It taxes the many for the benefit of the few; (2) it inter¬ 
feres with the natural currents of trade without sufficient reason 
for so doing; (3) it is as selfish as was Demetrius, the silver¬ 
smith (Acts xxiv.) ; (4) it prevents the agricultural class from 
finding a market for its productions; (5) it keeps foreign goods 
from our markets'; (6) it keeps our goods away from foreign 
markets; (7) it interferes with international relations, and is 
in the way of a brotherhood of nations; (8) protection is de¬ 
structive to free competition; (9) protection is one great cause 
of poverty, for it makes the people buy of a special class, and 
thus makes the expense of living high; (10) protection fosters 
monopoly, and enables a class to accumulate great wealth at 
the expense of the many. Free trade would do 'much to equal¬ 
ize wealth and promote the general welfare of the people. 

I do not here advocate the position of any political party. 
The; tariff question should be taken out of party politics, and 
placed in the hands of a commission of specialists’. I believe 
in reciprocity. 


MACUOCOSMUS. 


or, 


The State can do much by acting as a mediator between 
capital and labor. A few stubborn men can do the country 
incalculable harm. If a corporation will not do right, the au¬ 
thority that chartered it can certainly revoke its charter. The 
State should promote profit-sharing and co-operation so far as 
possible, and do all it can to bring about a more equitable dis¬ 
tribution of the wealth of the nation. If the State does not 
control monopolies, they will certainly control the State. 

The management of monopolies is now the greatest prob¬ 
lem for civil government to solve. It is certain that the bil¬ 
lionaire is rapidly coming. There are nearly one hundred es¬ 
tates in this country worth fifty millions each. At this rate 
it will not be long until we will have the billionaire. It will 
be the natural consequence of protecting monopolies. What 
can Ave do ? I answer: 

1. Place all natural monopolies into the hands of the Gov¬ 
ernment I am far from believing in Mr. Bellamy’s utopian 
scheme of nationalism. I think he goes to a great extreme, and 
violates some of the plainest laws of sociology; but he does, nev¬ 
ertheless, teach some Avholesome truths. Postmaster-General 
Wanamaker, in advocating the absorption of our telegraph sys¬ 
tem into the post-office and its management in the interest of 
the people, is looking in the right direction. In Great Britain 
the telegraph is part of the post-office, and those Avho have care- 
full v studied the two s\ r stems s claim that the English is far su- 
perior to our own. Our greatest thinkers are Avatching our 
railroad system Avitli a determination to bring about all neces- 
sarA r reforms. Soane, time ago a bill Avas introduced into the 
United States Senate providing for the Government to take the 
charge of certain roads, Avhich had been built by Government 
aid. 'this clearlv indicates the tendencv of the times. Com- 
petition is carried so far bv rival lines that economv finallv 
causes them to combine, and monopoly is the necessary result. 
This being the case, there is no remedy except for the Govern¬ 
ment to so use their monopoly as to advance the general Avelfare 
of the people. It has been clearly sIioavti by a. number of spe¬ 
cialists in this line that gas is not more than half as expensive 


THE LABOR PROBLEM. 


97 


vheie cities own their own gas-works. Hie same thing is tru 
with the electric light and other natural monopolies. 


2. Artificial monopolies should be carefully guarded by the 
Government. 1 am satisfied, however, that if the State owned 
all natural monopolies, the problem of artificial monopolies 
could be easily solved; for artificial .monopolies largely grow 
out, of natural monopolies. There are, however, some reforms 
necessary in reference to artificial monopolies. Invention 
might be given as an example. While inventors should be re¬ 
warded, there are some abuses in reference to our patent laws 
which should be corrected. It frequently happens that several 
persons independently make the same invention, and only one 
is rewarded. This is wrong. It is different with copyrights, 
for the writing of one book does not prevent another from 


writing another. 

3. It will, doubtless, some time become necessary for the 
State to limit the number of hours corporations have a right 
to work their men. We thus far have but little legislation on 
the subject. The Freemasons are about right in reference to 
the division of time*—eight hours to work, eight hours to sleep, 
and eight hours to look after the welfare of others. 

4. It may at some time become necessary for the Govern¬ 
ment to fix a maximum of wealth for the individual. Senator 
Ingalls, in 1891, declared in the United States Senate that no 
man could earn honestly a million dollars. Of course, a man 
is not entitled to 'more than lie can earn honestly. If the max¬ 
imum was fixed even a,t one million, it would be a great blessing 
to the country. A man can very properly be graduated when 
he earns a million dollars. The rest of life he can properly 
spend in working for the general good ; and it will make him 
more happy in this world, and better prepare him for the world 
to come. The following words by Senator Ingalls are worthy 
of careful thought: “The conscience of the nation was shocked 
at the injustice of modern society. The moral sentiment of 
mankind was aroused at the unequal distribution of wealth. 
The millionaires are arrayed like King Solomon in all his glory, 
but they Toil not, neither do they spin.’ These gigantic accu- 



98 


MACROCOSMUS. 


mulations are not the result of* industry and economy; there 
would he no protest against them if they were. The great bulk 
of the property of the country is passing into the hands of men 
who have no politics but plunder, and no principle but spolia¬ 
tion of the human race.’' 

If natural monopolies were placed into the hands of the 
general, State and municipal governments, and artificial mo¬ 
nopolies properly controlled, T am satisfic'd no individual eould 
accumulate enough property to injure society. There should 
be no conflict between individualism and socialism. Their unity 
is essential to the highest civilization. 


CHAPTER II. 

The Marriage Problem. 


INTRODUCTION. 

What God first designed, lie last created. Ho doubt man 
was in the divine mind when the first atom of matter was crea¬ 
ted. It required, however, preparation before that being could 
be ushered into existence who was to be made in the image 
of God. 

The animal feeds upon the vegetable, and the vegetable upon 
the mineral; but of what use is the animal, the vegetable, or 
the mineral ? Home whatever, had Jehovah stopped there. But 
he did not stop. “Let us make man,” was the language of him 
who had power to make. 

“Fairest of mortals, 

Him Jehovah 

On score of beauty crowned.” 

The word man in the Bible frequently comprehends woman. 
The Hebrews, the Greeks and the Latins have two words for 
man—one used in a generic sense, including woman ; the other 
in a specific sense, 'meaning simply man. In English we have 
the one word man; it is used sometimes in a generic and some¬ 
times in a specific sense. “In the image of God created he 
him; male and female created he them.” It required the two 
to constitute the image of God. Woman has no sphere, but a 
hemisphere; man has the rest of the sphere and the two make 
it complete. If the man has more head power, the woman has 
more heart, power, which is more effectual power. 

Among animals, the male is always more beautiful than 
the female. The male turkey has a magnificent form ; the male 
lion, a noble mane and majestic appearance. These things are 
quite wanting in the female. The male among animals is al¬ 
ways more musical than the female. It. is the chanticleer that 
wakes* the world with his eloquence. The hen does not crow, 
but cackles and clucks ; when one crows she is considered 

99 




100 


MAClvOCOSMUS. 


entirely out of her sphere. It is the roar of the male lion that 
shakes the forest; the female only has a savage yell. In the 
human race all this is reversed; for the woman is not only more 
beautiful, but by far the more melodious. 

We are perfectly satisfied with the Mosaic account of the 
creation of man and the origin of marriage. Philosophy has 
long concerned itself with the problem, and it is no nearer the 
solution than when it first began. It was not an uninspired 
pen which confidently recorded for the first time, in the original 
language, the sentence, “In the image of God created lie him; 
male and female created he them.” One woman was created 
for one man. Polygamy was not then known; but it took its 
origin in a more sensual aga In fact, the ]>erversiou of mar¬ 
riage was one of the worst works Satan has done for society. 

Milton puts the following language into the mouth of Adam 
at the first nuptials: 

“In the nuptial bower, 

1 led her blushing like the morn. All heaven 
And happy constellations on that hour 
Shed their selected influence; the earth 
Gave sign of gratulation, and each hill; 

Joyous the birds; fresh gales and gentle airs 
Whispered it to the woods, and from their wing? 

Flung rose, flung odors from the spicy shrub, 

Disporting, till the amorous bird of night 
Sung spousal, and bid haste the evening star, 

On his hilltop, to blight the bridal lamp.” 

Woman was created for a helpmeet for man; not a, slave, 
as sire has always been among savage nations, and is too much 
so among nations which are not willing to be called savage. 
As a helpmeet, she should be interested in her husband’s occu¬ 
pation ; and it is certainly a great mislake for a woman to marry 
a man if she can not be interested in his work. In fact, the 
Bible makes woman the counterpart of man. I once heard a 
woman wish that her husband had a different occupation, when 

he already had the one for which he was best suited. To marrv 

«• 

a man to such a woman is like yoking together the ox and the 
donkey; they are unequally yoked. 



<r 


THE MARRIAGE PROBLEM. 


101 


SECTION I.-OUTLINE HISTORY OF MARRIAGE. 

The first example we have of a violation of the original laws 
of marriage was in the case of Lamech, who had two wives, 
Adah and Zillah. His language to them is the only extant rem¬ 
nant of antideluvian poetry. The Bible nowhere sanctions 
polygamy; and those who practiced it suffered fo*r their viola¬ 
tion of the original laws of marriage. This is clearly shown 
in the family troubles of David and Solomon, 

Savage nations have always violated the rights of the fair 
sex. In Greenland, girls frequently prefer death to marriage 
—very unnatural. In Lapland, however, it is quite different, 
because the treatment is not so bad. It is said that when a 
couple in Lapland want to get married, their friends assemble 
to see them run a race. The girl has one-third of the distance; 
and if he does not overtake her, it is a penal offense for him to 
renew the courtship. If the girl loves him, she will run fast 
to try his courage; but is certain to linger before reaching the 
end of the race. Human nature is about the same in all ages 
and among all races. 

The aborigines of America were very cruel to their women, 
and they imposed all the burdens upon them. Woman’s suffer¬ 
ings were such that the mother would frequently put to death 
her female child to save it from her own unhappy fate. The 
following is the response of a mother to Father Gumilla, a Jesuit 
missionary, who remonstrated with her for committing such a 
revolting crime: “I wish to God, father, that my mother had, 
by my death, prevented the distress I have endured, and have 
yet to endure as long as I live. Consider, father, our deplor¬ 
able condition. Our husbands go hunting, and trouble them¬ 
selves no further. We are dragged along with one infant at 
the breast and another in a basket. When we return in the 
evening they require us to make chica for them to get drunk 
on. They get drunk, and draw us by the hair of our heads. 
What have we to console us for all this suffering? A young 
wife is brought in upon us, and she is permitted to abuse us 
and our children.” Courtship among the Indians presents a 


102 


MACROCOSMUS. 


more interesting feature of Indian life. When an Indian 
wishes to get married, he presents himself at the door of the 
lady’s wigwam. If she is perfectly silent when he enters, si¬ 
lence gives consent, and thev are immediately married. 

One of the first kingdoms of the world was Egypt, Much 
of the wealth and luxury of the western world can be traced 
to Egypt. Egypt was in a high state of civilization before Car¬ 
thage, Greece or Rome was known. Her monuments are an 
evidence of her greatness, and they have been a wonder even to 
modern civilization. Moses, the Hebrew lawgiver, was edu¬ 
cated in Egypt to better qualify him for the great work to> which 
God had called him. Much of the high civilization of Egypt 
is due to the position her women occupied. Woman had all 
the advantages of education which that early age afforded. The 
Egyptians thought that Menes, their first king, instituted the 
laws of marriage. Their mythology, as that of most na- 
tions, teaches monogamy; and it can be said to their credit, that 
the ancient Egyptians seldom violated the divine law of mar¬ 
riage. Osiris had his Isis, as had Jupiter his Juno, and Pluto 
his Proserpine. There was nothing peculiar about the mar¬ 
riage ceremonies of the Egyptians except the fact that the hus¬ 
band had to pledge obedience to the wife instead of the wife 
obedience to the husband. In the great kingdoms built upon 
the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates, polygamy reduced 
woman to complete servitude. The worship of the goddess Ve¬ 
nus was destructive to the morality of the great kingdoms of 
the East. The last of the Chaldean rulers was feasting with 
his wives and nobles when the mysterious hand wrote upon 
the wall the fate of Belshazzar and the doom of Babylon. The 
same things also led to the destruction of the kingdoms suc¬ 
ceeding it. I he prophet Daniel clearly shows their unity in 
principle; and they were all characterized by the same deterio¬ 
rating tendencies. Even the Macedonian Empire, that in¬ 
cluded the intellectual Greeks, had no appreciation of the true 
value of woman. V liile Rome in her early history was true 
to the divine law of marriage, when she became a great empire 
she adopted the vices of the East. Lucretia and Virginia lived 


THE MARRIAGE PROBLEM. 


103 


long before the days of the empire. Julius Caesar rebuked the 
women of his day for the affection they bestowed upon dogs 
and 'monkeys instead of children. 

Among the nations of southern Europe, such as France, 
Italy and Spain, young ladies have little or no freedom. They 
are educated in convents, and carefully guarded from male 
society. As soon as they are educated they get married, and 
they then have perfect freedom. This better enables us to 
understand the affair of Lord Byron and the young Countess 
Guichiola. In Spain love is full of sentiment and the absorb* 
ing passion of the soul. The fair ones are won by acts of corn*- 
age, as the old spirit of chivalry has not yet lost, its power. One 
opportunity for displaying this is at the national bull-fights. 
This gave rise to the following lines by Hudibras: 

“He obtains the noblest spouse 
Who widows greatest herds of cows.” 

The Anglo-Saxon race has always held woman in high 
esteem. The union of their chivalry with Christianity is the 
principal cause of modern civilization. In the early history 
of the Germans, it was considered very disgraceful for a man 
not to have some object of affection in whose defense he was 
willing to die. When several lovers aspired to the hand of 
some celebrated beauty, tbev settled it in combat,, and the con- 
queror won the lady. This gave rise to the maxim: “Hone but 
the brave deserve the fair.” Woman’s position in England is 
far superior to her position in southern Europe. What would be 
considered entirely proper in a French or Spanish lady would he 
condemned in an English woman. The courts of English mon- 
archs, however, have not always presented the most proper 
examples. Charles II. had his court filled with mistresses; 
and George IV. did much to lower the tone of public morals, 
and to disseminate vice and luxury throughout his great empire. 
The women of the great middle class in England certainly rep¬ 
resent the highest type of true womanhood. The women of 
the Anglo-Saxon race in America doubtless enjoy more free¬ 
dom than the women of any other part of the world. The young 


104 


MACROCOSM US. 


people make their own engagements; rhe best parlor is fur¬ 
nished; and they can spend a large part of the night tete-artete, 
with freedom from scandal, and in a majority of cases without 
any impropriety in conduct. American women, as a rule, are 
noted for their high moral worth; and they are doing much 
to counteract those evil tendencies so fearfully visible even at 
the beginning of the twentieth century. 

SECTION II.-THE REQUISITES OF A TRUE MARRIAGE. 

(1) There should be temperamental adaptation. The par¬ 
ties should be the counterparts of each other; and wherein one 
is deficient, the other should supply the deficiency. It is un¬ 
fortunate for both to be hasty in temper. (2) There should 
be adaptation in age. As a rule, the man should be the older; 
but not more than one hundred years older, unless the woman 
really marries for money. (3) There should be adaptation in 
taste. The woman is a helpmeet, and can not well succeed, as 
such unless there is some similarity of taste. If the man wants 
to teach and the woman wants him to follow some other Oceania- 

A. 

lion, there is a conflict. (4) There should be intellectual adap¬ 
tation. I have known lady schoolteachers to marry farmers, 
and I have seldom known such matches to be happy. (5) 
There should be moral adaptation. Frequently Christian 
women marry moral lepers; and there certainly can be no true 
marriage in this. Sam Jones is not far wrong wlien he says 
that such men need a cowhide. (6) There should be religious 
adaptation. F"o man has a right to marry a woman, and 
ask her to give up her religious convictions simply to please 
him. Christians should not marry infidels. Paul teaches 
Christians to marry only in the Lord; but many ignore this, 
and marry only in the devil. (7) In true marriage there is 
pure and exalted mutual love. A ceremony without this can 
not constitute a true marriage. Jacob had the affection essen¬ 
tial to a ti*ue marriage, when he worked seven years for his 
beloved Rachel. I have always thought that Laban was cruel 
in giving him the wrong woman. His love, however, was such 
that he actually worked seven years longer to obtain Rachel. 


THE MARRIAGE PROBLEM. 


105 


Shakespeare says, “There is language in her eye, her cheek, her 
lip.’’ “In many ways,” says Coleridge, ‘"does the full heart 
reveal the presence of the love it would conceal.” 

Love has baffled the skill of philosophy to elucidate it. 
Cicero calls it “the philosophy of the heart.” Another great 
writer calls it “the finest of the fine arts.” Love is not want¬ 
ing in its martyrs. When there was war between England and 
Scotland, and the fear of Douglas was upon every heart, a beau¬ 
tiful English lady declared that she would marry the man who 
successfully defended Douglas Castle, then in the hands of the 
English, against Douglas himself. Sir John Walton undertook 
the task and perished in the attempt 

Tailing in love is said to be a serio-comic business, and one 
in which all engage; but I do not like the expression, for we 
should not fall into anything. I suppose, however, it is the 
best we can do. A student graduates with high honors, and is 
soon the victim of a glance from a sunny face. lie meets the 
fair maiden, and soon loses his heart. It is said that a father 
once had his son educated where he had him carefully guarded 
from female society. When he had graduated, and was return¬ 
ing home with his father, they met a young man and young 
lady in a carriage. He said to his father, “What is it that 
the man has with him V 9 The father responded, “A goose.” 
“Then, father, please get me a goose.” 


SECTION III.-IMPEDIMENTS TO A TRUE MARRIAGE. 

1. The love of money, which is a root of all evil, frequently 
stands in the way of true marriage. Lazy young men and 
extravagant young women make marriage the means of obtain- 
ing a living. It is said that there was once a young man of 
Ohio, who was introduced to a young lady in Pennsylvania, 
and informed at the time that her father was worth eight thou¬ 
sand dollars. That was quite a. sum in the early settlement 
of the country. He was led to believe that there were but two 
children, and thought four thousand was to come to his lot if 
lie married the young lady. they were soon married, and went 
to his home in Ohio. In about six months, she wanted to visit 


106 


MACROCOSM US. 


her brothers and sisters. He inquired how many she had. Her 
response was, “There are nine of us.'’ “I thought there were 
only two,” said he. She replied that there were only two of 
them at home. He then said, ‘‘Nine into eight will go' no 
times." 

Parents who force their daughters into interested alliances 
are more guilty than were the Ammonites, who sacrificed their 
children to Moloch. In the sacrifice to Moloch, a speedy death 
was the result ; but in marrying the daughters to those whom 
they do not love, a life of torture is the result, Themistocles 
was asked what he thought of marrying his daughter to a man 
without an estate. He replied, “I would rather marry her to 
a man without an estate than to an estate without a man.” 
Charlemagne married his daughter to a private secretary. 

2. The inordinate love of gay attire is a great impediment 
to true marriage. We do not object to proper ornament; but, 
according to the modern code, the ornaments of maiden mod¬ 
esty, gentleness and grace are ruled out, and silks and satins, 
with a gaudy display, are substituted in their place. 

3. Girls frequently marry too young, and before- they are 
capable of making a choice. They substitute fancy for love; 
and when it is too late, find out that they are in no- sense 
adapted to each other. 

4. Marriages are sometimes too hasty. It is said that 
George Xesbert married after an acquaintance of three days. 
Their friends, however, had long thought they would suit each 
other; and when they met they were old enough to make a deci¬ 
sion. Hasty marriages frequently lead to serious results. 

5. The actions of some who do get married cause others to 
become old bachelors and old maids. The husband and wife 
should certainly treat each other as well after marriage as be- 
fore. It is well for courtship to end in marriage, but not end 
at marriage. 

6. Loose divorce laws greatly interfere with true marriage. 
Many marry in haste, because they think if they are not suited, 
they can easily obtain a divorce. Christ laid down the true law 


THE MARRIAGE PROBLEM. 


107 


of divorce; and if all nations would strictly adopt it, the result 
would be a great blessing to society. Read carefully Matt. xix. 
9: “And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, 
except for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth 
adultery; and he that marrieth her when she is put away oom- 
mitteth adultery.” 

7. Infidel attacks upon the family have been great impedi¬ 
ments in the way of true marriage. They have tended to< de¬ 
stroy the sacredness of family ties. Napoleon I. said that the 
great want of France was a new race of mothers. This may be 
said of other nations besides France. Great pagan writers af¬ 
ford us illustrations of true'marriage; and these illustrations are 
in harmony with the Bible and the nature of things. Plutarch 
tolls us of the wife of Phocion, who took the body of her mar- 
tyred husband outside of Attic soil, kindled the funeral pyre, 
gathered up the ashes, and placed them under her hearthstone 
to repose in peace until the Athenians came to their right minds. 
Xenophon, in his “Cyropedia,” gives a pathetic description of 
Panthea, the wife of Abradatus, who was captured by Cyrus. 
Cyrus offered to make her his queen ; but she insisted on return¬ 
ing to her husband. Even Cyrus greatly admired her loyalty. 
Pliny the Younger, in writing about his wife Calpurnia, to her 
aunt, said: “She is in love with the immortal part, of me.” 
How different, indeed, is this code of nature from that of the 
freelover. 

Carlyle, in his “French Revolution,” tells us of the French 
prisoner in the Bastile, whose only request was to learn some¬ 
thing of his wife. Macaulay, in speaking of the death of 
Hampden, Cromwell’s cousin and associate, says: “When he 
rode off the field of battle, he put. his hand upon his forehead, 
and gazing long upon the manor house of his father-in-law, 
from which in his youth he had taken away his wife Elizabeth, 
he tried to go there to die.” We will conclude this chapter bv 
quoting the following beautiful lines of Michel Angelo concern¬ 
ing the woman whom he loved* 


MACROCOSM US. 


108 


“Thy beauty, antepart of joys above, 

Instructs me in the bliss that saints approve; 

For, oh! how good, how beautiful must be 
The God that made so good a thing as thee, 

So fair an image of the heavenly Love. 

Forgive me if I can not turn away 

From those sweet eyes that are my earthly heaven; 

For they are guiding stars, benignly given 

To tempt my footsteps to the upward way; 

And if I dwell too fondly in thy sight, 

I live and love in God’s peculiar light.” 


CHAPTER III. 

The Liquor Problem. 

O madness! to think use of strongest wines 
And strongest drink, our chief support of health, 

When God, with these' forbidden, made choice to rear 
His mighty champion strong beyond compare, 

Whose drink was only from the limpid brook. 

— Milton. 

SECTION I.-THE BIBLE AND TEETOTALISM. 

The temperance habits of the Hebrews are a subject worthy 
of careful investigation. Much obscurity overhangs the sub¬ 
ject, even at the present time; but it is to be feared that many 
interpret the Bible with a view to gratify sensual desires and 
extenuate sinful practices. I believe that the Scriptures forbid 
intoxication to any extent, and that the use of intoxicating 
drinks is strictly forbidden in the Bible. 

1. Intoxicating drinks have a very injurious effect upon 
the human, system. Physiology teaches that the human system 
has been constructed with a view to perfection. Its operations 
are all intended to harmonize, and produce that state which 
is denominated health. Every deviation from health arises 
from an infringement upon the laws of nature. It is, of course, 
wrong for a man to violate the laws of health. Intoxicating 
drinks injure the body in the following ways: (1) They de¬ 
stroy the healthy relations of the system. They produce an 
unnatural excitement, without adding anything to^ the strength 
of the system. (2) Intemperance diminishes, and finally ex¬ 
hausts man’s vitality. (3) It prevents the organs of restora¬ 
tion from performing their functions in a healthy manner. It 
prevents the effectual separation of old and useless matter, and 
the new matter introduced is not possessed of a healthy nature 
essential to restoration. (4) The deleterious effects of intoxi¬ 
cating drinks are transmitted to posterity. (5) Intemperance 
has had a deteriorating influence upon the nations of the past. 
God never sanctions that which produces so much evil. The 


110 


MACEOCOSMUS. 


Bible, then, which is God’s book, does not sanction the use of 
intoxicating wine. 

2 . Intoxicating beverages have a very injurious effect upon 
the intellectual and moral faculties cf man. Man is a being 
peculiarly subject to numerous and strong temptations. His 
intellectual powers are in continual quest of variety and nov¬ 
elty, and to escape danger requires correct guidance and judi¬ 
cious restraint. In order to accomplish this, artificial excite¬ 
ment must be carefully avoided. Inebriating liquors are ex¬ 
citing and fascinating, and they get the better of man before be 
knows it. Xo man, at the commencement of his career of in¬ 
temperance, intends to become an habitual drunkard. The 
habit is acquired by moderate use, and the majority of mod¬ 
erate drinkers ultimately become dissipated characters. Many 
facts irresistible show that there is no safety in moderate drink- 
ing. Security can only be obtained by total abstinence. In¬ 
toxicating drinks weaken the perceptive powers; they extin¬ 
guish reason; they pervert the memory and corrupt the imag¬ 
ination. 

Drinking habits are perfectly ruinous to the moral powers 
of man. They enervate these powers; they weaken the sta¬ 
bilities of virtuous resolutions; they blunt the acuteness of the 
moral feelings, and decrease their activity. That which bru¬ 
talizes the feelings, excites the passions and destroys the nat¬ 
ural affections, can not be right. The Bible never sanctions 
the article that has such injurious effects. If we are to judge 
the tree by its fruits, we must forever condemn the use of fer¬ 
mented beverages. God evidently intended man for a social 
and benevolent being. Man was made in Jehovah’s image, 
God does not sin against his own image by teaching in the 
Bible the use of intoxicating beverages. 

3. God never sanctioned the use of inebriating drinks by 
the Hebrews. I he Bible clearlv teaches that intoxicating and 
nnintoxicating wines then existed, as it teaches that good and 
bad men then lived. The intoxicating is condemned as bad 
wine, and the unintoxicating is recommended as good. 


TITE LIQUOR PROBLEM. 


Ill 


Among the ancients unfermented beverages existed, and 
weire a common drink. Dr. Lees says: “It is a fact that tee- 

e pervaded the primeval empires of the 
world; that it was preached and practiced hv the greatest moral 
reformers and spiritual teachers of antiquity—was a part in¬ 
deed of the religious culture of the Egyptians centuries before 
the Hebrew nation existed.” To preserve their wines sweet, 
ihe ancients resorted to boiling and other methods which de¬ 
stroyed the power and activity of the gluten, or effectually sep¬ 
arated it from the juice of the grape. When they drank their 
wines they mixed them with water. It was so common in Italy 
to mix wine with water that they had in Rome an establish¬ 
ment for the purpose. 

The Hebrew word yayin is generic like our English word 
“wine,” and it denotes the use of grape juice in all its condi¬ 
tions. It is cognate with the Greek oinos, the Latin vinum, 
the Italian and Spanish vino, the German yjein, and the Eng¬ 
lish wine. Because the generic word “wine” sometimes denotes 
intoxicating drinks, there are those who conclude that it always 
means such drinks. The word “spirit” is sometimes translated 
breath; by the same logic we might conclude that it always 
means breath. The word “heaven” sometimes means atmos¬ 
phere; we must, for this reason, always translate it atmosphere ? 
John Stuart Mill, in his “System of Logic,” says: “A generic 
word is always liable to become limited to- a single species :.f 
people have occasion to think and speak of that species oftener 
than of anything else contained in the genus. The tide of cus¬ 
tom first drifts the word on the shore of a particular meaning, 
then retires and leaves it there.” This is exactly what has 
been done with the word “wine.” It has drifted on the shore 
of intoxication, and many are willing to leave it there. The 
constant tendency on the part of humanity to pervert even the' 

words of the Bihle shows that Satan has not vet retired from 

•/ 

this world. 

The institutions of the Hebrews were certainlv calculated to 

A J 

make them a sober people. The Ehzarite vow required total 
abstinence from all intoxicating drinks. We find among those 


132 


MACROCOSMUS. 


who had taken this vow such men as were Samson, Samuel, 
Daniel, and, in fact, all those names which were the greatest 
ornaments to the Hebrew nation. The prophets denounced the 
sin of drunkenness in unsparing terms; and even pronounced 
a woe upon all who would put the bottle to their neighbor’s 
lips. During the degenerate days of Ahab, the order of Pecii- 
abites was founded. Like the Haza,rites, they took a total ab¬ 
stinence vow. From them Jeremiah taught the Israelites an 
important lesson (Jer. xxxv.). 

Christ and his apostles condemn the use of alcoholic wine. 
Some claim that Jesus made intoxicating v T ine at Cana, of Gal¬ 
ilee; but I do not think that such was the case. The critical 
Dr. Trench says: “He who each year prepares the wine in the 
grape, causing it to drink up and swell with the moisture of the 
earth and heaven, to transmute this into its own nobler juices, 
concentrated all those slower processes now into the act of a 
single moment, and accomplished in an instant what, ordinarily 
he does not accomplish but in months A Some claim that 
Jesus used intoxicating wine in the institution of his Supper. 
This could not be, for he used the Passover bread and wine, 
and the Jews were not permitted to have there anything that 
had fermented (Ex. xii. 8, 39). How often, indeed, do men 
quote Paul's recommendation to Timothy to use a little wine 
for the stomach’s sake, to justify their drinking habits. I 
believe the wine recommended was unintoxicating, for the fol¬ 
lowing reasons: (1) Previous to this, Timothy drank only wa¬ 
ter; (2) Paul does not condemn him for his teetotalism, but 
seeks to confirm him in his abstinence (T. Tim. iii. 2-8); (3) 

Paul recommends the wine as a medicine. A then am s savs: 

«/ 

“Let him take qleukus, sweet wine, either mixed with watm* 
or warmed, especially that called protopos, as being very good 
for the stomach.” “Let us watch and be sober” (I. Thess. v. 
6-8). Paul here uses the Greek neephomen. It is composed 
of ne, not, and pmo, to drink. Paul was evidently an advo¬ 
cate of teetotalism. 

Some persons are greatly prejudiced against what they call 
the two-wine theory. We are not advocating a two-wine theory 


THE LIQUOR PROBLEM. 


113 


more RT1 \ ve are advocating a two-man theory. A man 
may be good, and then become bad; the same thing is true with 
wine. Solomon, the wisest of men, saw something in wine, 
when it is red, very injurious to those who drink it; for on 
account of its effects, he ascribes to it personal qualities. He 
says: “W ine is a mocker; strong drink is raging; and 
whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise” (Prov. xx. 1). 
Those acquainted with the history of wine, know that 
persons who drink it do exactly the things here ascribed to 
the wine. 

“Look not thou upon the wine when it is red” (Pr’ov. xxiii. 
31, 32). That is, we should not behold nor desire it when it 
is red. Intoxicating wine has a reddish, tinge. “When it giv- 
eth his colour in the cup.” Literally, when it gives in the 
vessel its eye. By its eye is meant the sparkling point which 
science attributes to the passing off of carbonic acid gas gen¬ 
erated by fermentation. “When it moveth itself aright.” Lit¬ 
erally, when it moves in straight lines. The ascending gas 
indicates fermentation. “At the last it biteth like a serpent.” 
The same word is used of the fiery serpents in the wilderness 
(Hum. xxi. 6). “And stingeth like an adder.’’ It pierces the 
drinker a,s would a viper. If you do not doubt the poisonous 
character of the fiery serpents, and the poisons imparted by the 
adder’s sting, how can you doubt the poisonous character of 
intoxicating beverages ? 

It is the alcohol in the wine that is condemned. In fact, 
alcohol is the intoxicating principle in all fermented beverages. 
The Bible does not condemn wine until after fermentation. It 
recommends the pure juice of the grape. 

In the Scripture we have had before us, alcoholic wine is 
regarded as a poison to the human system. Modern science 
has confirmed the teaching of Proverbs on this subject. Alco¬ 
hol injures the stomach by preventing the digestion of food; 
it injures the heart by imposing upon it an extra, burden; it 
injures the brain bv hardening the albumen it contains. The 
nervous and muscular systems are by it deranged. It next 


I 


114 


MACROCOSMUS. 


reaches the mind of man, and converts a rational being into a 
madman. The very image of God, in which man was made, 
is defaced by the ruthless and malignant invader. 

SECTION II.-THE LIQUOR TRAFFIC AND THE STATE. 

What has the liquor traffic done to the state ? I answer: 
(1) It is the chief cause of crime. This subject will be dis¬ 
cussed hereafter. (2) It greatly injures the health of the peo¬ 
ple. Latham truly says: “Health is the capital of the laboring 
man.” Dr. Edward Jarvis says: “Every law, grant or priv¬ 
ilege from the legislature should have this invariable condi¬ 
tion: That human health, strength or comfort should, in no 
manner or degree, be impaired or vitiated thereby.” The in¬ 
jurious effect of alcoholic drinks upon the health of the people 
is almost universally admitted. In fact, this is evident from 
the position of life insurance companies. The evil effects of 
alcoholic drinks are transmitted to posterity, and this makes 
the curse still greater. (3) The liquor traffic is destructive to 
the home. This is so evident that the best women in the land 
are uniting their efforts to annihilate that which wages a war¬ 
fare against mother, wife and daughter. (4) This fearful 
traffic is the principal cause of pauperism in this country. 
AV end ell Phillips, somewhere, has said that the civilization of 
a people often depends on the use made of the surplus dollar. 
Xo true student of society can do otherwise than conclude that 
a large part of the pauperism of the country can be directly 
traced to the use of alcoholic drinks. (5) The liquor traffic 
is rapidly wasting our resources. The direct cost of the liquor 
bill of this nation is now nearly one billion of dollars. The 
indirect cost is evidently as great. AAffien we consider these 
facts, it is not surprising that there are so many persons with¬ 
out proper food and raiment. What should the state do to the 
liquor traffic? I answer, without any hesitation, or mental 
reservation whatever, that it should prohibit so deadlv a foe. 
John 'Stuart Mill and Herbert Spencer carry their ideas of 
personal liberty so far that their theory would not even, permit 
the state to educate. Mr. Spencer, in his “Social Statics,” op- 


THE LlQUOJi PliOBLEM. 


115 


poses all state provision for the poor, and on page 161 actually 
says that the state has no right to educate). He even goes fur¬ 
ther than this, and claims that government is an essentially 
immoral institution. He even claims that sanitary inspection 
on the part of the state is a violation of rights. Professor 
Huxley is certainly right when lie calls such positions in refer¬ 
ence to the functions of government Administrative Nihilism. 
We can take even Mr. Mill’s essay on “Liberty,” and show 
from it that the liquor traffic should be abolished. On page 
23 he says: “That the only purpose for which power can be 
rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community 
against his will, is to prevent harm to others.” No one can 
question the fact that the liquor traffic does harm to> others. 
Then, according to Mr. Mill himself, it should be prohibited. 

I believe that law and civil government are a necessity. 
Arthur Helps says: “It is the opinion of some people, but, as 1 
contend, a wrong and delusive opinion, that, as civilization 
advances, there be less and less need of government. I main¬ 
tain that, on the contrary, there will be more need.” Profes- 
sor Huxley is right in his position that as society advances 
and men come into closer proximity to one another, it becomes 
less possible for one to do wrong without interfering more or 
less with the freedom of his fellows. It is certainly, then, the 
duty of the state to make it as easy as possible for men to <lo 
right, and as difficult as possible for them to do wrong. If 
these principles were carried out, it would not be long until 
the liquor traffic would be abolished. 

In England the right of the state to prohibit the liquor traf¬ 
fic has not been seriously questioned, for it is a maxim with 
the English that Parliament is politically omnipotent, Mr. 
Blackstone says: “It can, in short, do everything that is not 
naturally impossible.” I have questioned many eminent law¬ 
yers ; and have never vet had one denv that the state has the 
right to prohibit the liquor traffic when it sees proper so to do. 
In fact, I have given much attention myself to the science of 
law and the science of government, and I know T am right on 
this subject, Mr. Bishop, a great criminal law writer, says: 


1.16 


MACROCOSMUS. 


“The state, in the enactment of its laws, must, exercise its 
judgment concerning what acts tend to corrupt the public mor¬ 
als, impoverish the community, disturb the public repose, in¬ 
jure the other public interests, or even impair the comfort 
of individual members over whom its protecting watch and 
care are required.” The very.fact that the state has the right 
to license the liquor traffic, shows its right to prohibit it; for 
license is partial prohibition. 

Some are in great trouble lest the state should tell the peo¬ 
ple what to eat and what to drink. I do not think that they 
are in danger just here; but the state evidently has the right 
to tell them what they shall sell. It has the right to prohibit 
a traffic that is ruinous to the true interest of the people. Pro¬ 
fessor Huxley thus speaks on the subject: “It was urged that, 
if the right of the state to step beyond assigned limits were 
admitted, there was no stop, and the principle which allowed 
the state to enforce vaccination or education would allow it to 
prescribe his religious belief, the number of courses he had for 
dinner, or the pattern of his waistcoat. The answer to that 
was surely obvious, for on similar grounds the right of a man 
to eat when ho is hungry went, for if they allowed a man to 
cat at all there w r as nothing to stop him from gorging. Tn prac¬ 
tice, a man left off when he had sufficient. So the co-operative 
reason of the community would soon find out when state inter¬ 
ference had been carried far enough.” 

Some object to prohibition on the ground that the law is 
violated. On the' same ground, they could object to all law. 
Prohibition has been as successful as other laws under like cir¬ 
cumstances ; and its success is very evident on account of the 
bitter opposition of liquor-dealers to it. One important fact, 
in the discussion of this subject, is generally overlooked, and 
that is the educational influence of law. What the law makes 
right, the people generally consider right. Dr. Thomas Arnold 
uses these weighty words: “Law and government are the sover¬ 
eign influence in human society, in the last resort they shape 
and control at their pleasure; institutions depend on them, and 
are by them formed and modified; what they sanction will ever 


THE LIQUOR PROBLEM. 


117 


be generally considered innocent,; what they condemn is thereby 
made a crime, and, if persisted in, becomes rebellion/’ 

The progress of prohibition has indeed been encouraging. 
It is ever widening its range. Prohibition States find it dif¬ 
ficult to enforce the law with their neighbors under the influ¬ 
ence of the rum traffic. The most advanced thinkers on the 
subject advocate national prohibition by an amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States. We not onlv want national 

t/ 

prohibition, but we want prohibition throughout the world. 
Those who believe in a brotherhood of nations can not advo¬ 
cate anything less. The civilized nations of the world have 
disgraced themselves in the attitude they took towards the rum 
traffic at the Berlin Conference. Free rum in Africa is a 
disgrace to the Christian world. The Christian nations have, 
however, passed some prohibitory laws in harmony with a true 
civilization. The powers bordering on the Forth Sea passed 
the celebrated prohibitory agreement of 1887. The prohibitory 
law for the Samoan Islands passed in 1889 by the United 
States, Great Britain and Germany, is in the same direction. 
Mav the Prohibition cause continue to grow in interest until 
the nefarious liquor traffic is forever banished from this beau¬ 
tiful earth. 


CHAPTER IV. 

The Sunday Problem. 


INTRODUCTION. 

Reason and natural religion seem to make it necessary to 
have stated times for worship; and it appears plain from his¬ 
tory that such has been the practice of the nations of the past. 
This affords strong presumptive proof in favor of a Sabbath. 
Man is a moral and religious being; and he is certainly not 
properly educated when these elements in his nature are neg¬ 
lected. The Sabbath has always afforded an opportunity for 
such education,. We, of course, speak of the Sabbath as a day 
of rest, and have no direct reference to the Jewish Sabbath. 
While the Lord’s Day is much more than a Sabbath to Chris¬ 
tians, it is nothing more than a Sabbath to those who are not 
Christians. It is, however, needed by all. 

It is claimed by some that on eleventh of our time is thrown 
away.. You had as w r ell claim that one-third of our time is 
thrown away in sleep. Man is so constituted that he must have 
sleep or suffer direful consequences; the same thing can be 
said in reference to the clay of rest. It has been, clearly dean- 
onstrated that man and beast need a clav of rest; and when 
this natural law is not observed, the health of both is greatly 
injured. Man can accomplish more physical and intellectual 
work by resting one-seventh of his time than he can bv working 
all the time. It is perfectly safe to state that, one of the great¬ 
est evils in modern society is the violation of God’s law in 

* %j 

reference to the day of rest. 

SECTION I.-THE DIVINE ORIGIN AND UNIVERSALITY OF THE 

SABBATH. 

There has been much discussion among learned men as to 
the time when the Sabbath was instituted. The celebrated Dr. 
Paley takes the position that the Sabbath was not, instituted 

until the sending of manna to the Israelites in the wilderness. 

118 


THE SUNDAY PROBLEM. 


119 


This view I think incorrect,, for the following reasons: (1) In 
Gen. ii. 3, we hntl these words, “And God blessed the seventh 
day, and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from 
all his works which God had created and made.” This makes 
it plain to my mind that the Sabbath was instituted at the 
beginning. It is claimed that days in Genesis are long periods 
of time, and that God’s Sabbath yet continues. This may be 
true: but it is also true that the word “day” is used in three 
senses in the first of Genesis. It was not simply twenty-four 
hours that man was required to sanctify, but each successive 
seventh day. The Sabbath shares with marriage as being relics 
left to man from paradise lost, and these beautiful flowers point 
both to man’s Edenic home. (2) The Sabbath was certainly 
instituted before the days of Laban; for we learn from Gen. 


xxix. 26-28, that the time was divided into' weeks. Days, 
months and years are natural institutions, but weeks appear to 
be entirely positive. (3) The laws in reference to manna 
clearly indicate that the Sabbath was an existing institution 
(Ex. xvi. 22-30). From these facts we are safe in concluding 
that the Sabbath was universal in character, and was observed 
by all the leading nations of antiquity. It doubtless had its 
source in God’s first revelation to man. 


SECTION II.-THE JEWISH SABBATH. 

It is made plain in the Decalogue, recorded in Exodus xx., 
that the Sabbath was an old institution which the Israelites 
were to remember. It was so adopted by them as to make it 
a national Sabbath as much as the Sabbath of the Egyptians 
was national. It was" a sign between God and the children of 
Israel, and was not common to all nations. 

Some persons go to a great extreme, and claim that the 
Jewish Sabbath is still binding upon Christians; yet they are 
far from observing the Jewish Sabbath. Its penalties for vio¬ 
lation were so peculiar that there are not many Sabbatarians 
who would be alive if its penalties were now executed. Even 
the preparation of food or the making of a fire was punished 
by death. 



i 20 


MACEOCOSMUS. 


For tlie following reasons we conclude that the Jewish 
{Sabbath is not binding upon Christians: (1) It was a positive 
institution so far as it was peculiar to Israel, and was fulfilled 
with the Jewish law. All persons should understand the dif¬ 
ference between moral and positive law. A moral law is one 
in which we can see in the thing itself reasons why it should 
Ik? observed. It is right in itself. The moral law teaches that 
man should have a day of rest and sanctify a portion of his 
time to the service of God; but it does not select any particular 
day. It teaches that in all ages man must observe a Sabbath 
day; but the day itself to be observed depends upon positive 
law or example. Positive law is right because commanded, 
and not because it is right in itself. The moral elements in 
the Jewish Sabbath are of perpetual obligation, because moral¬ 
ity can not be abolished; but the Jewish Sabbath as a positive 
institution has certainly been abrogated. (2) Paul, in Col. ii. 
14-17, clearly teaches that the Jewish Sabbath has been abro¬ 
gated. In fact, he includes in this Scripture all the typical and 
ceremonial institutions of both the patriarchal and Jewish 
ages. Circumcision belongs to both ages, and it is included as 
well as the Sabbath. When the substance ca'me through Christ, 
all the shadows disappeared. 

SECTION III.-THE LORl/s DAY. 

We have already shown that both nature and revelation 
point to the duty of observing one day in seven as a day of 
rest and worship. We have also shown that the Jewish Sab¬ 
bath has been abolished. Have we now the liberty to select any 
day we please, or is there divine authority for observing one 
specific day? For the following reasons I believe that we have 
divine authority for observing the first day of the week, which 
is the Lord’s Day. 

i. The-Christian Fathers teach that we should observe the 
first day of the iveek. Barnabas, the companion of Paul, says: 
“The eighth day is the beginning of another world; and there¬ 
fore with joy we celebrate the eighth day. on which Jesus rose 
from the dead.” Mosheim gives the following language from 


THE SUNDAY PROBLEM. 


121 


Justin Martyr: ‘ k On the Lord’s Day all Christians in the city 
or country meet together, because that is the day of our Lord’s 
resurrection ; and then we read the apostles and prophets.” He 
also states that they attended to the Lord’s Supper; that there 
was preaching and a collection. No one can reasonably ques¬ 
tion the fact that Justin Martyr meant by the Lord’s Day the 
first day of the week. In 1870, on the banks of the Minnesota 
River, at St. Peter, Minn,, I read Eusebius for the first time, 
and I was much impressed with his teaching on the* subject. 
He says : “From the beginning the Christians assembled on the 
first day of the week, called by them the Lord’s Day, to read 
the Scriptures, to preach, and to celebrate the Lord’s Supper.” 

2. The apostolic church observed the first day of the week. 
Paul’s directions to the churches of Galatia and Corinth are 
plain on the subject. In I. Cor. xvi. 1, 2, we read as follows: 


u 


Now concerning the collection which is for the saints, as 


ordered the churches of Galatia, so also do you. On the first 
day of the week [kata mian Sabbaton] let each of you lav 
something by itself, according as he may have prospered, put¬ 
ting it into the treasury; that there may be no collections when 
I come.” Paul actually calls the Lord’s Day the first of a new 
order of Sabbaths, showing plainly that in it is fulfilled the 
ancient Sabbath. We learn front Acts xx. 6, 7, that Paul 
waited seven days at Troas in order to meet with the disciples 
on the first day of the week. The language reads thus: “And 
we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened 
bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days, where we 
abode seven days. And on the first day of the week, when the 
disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached to them, 
ready to depart on the morrow, and continued his speech until 


midnight,” 

3. It was on the Lord’s Day that the Church of Christ took 

its origin. Compare Acts ii. 1-4 with Lev. xxiii. 9-21, and you 

will be convinced that the dav of Pentecost came on the first 

#/ 

day of the week. It was on that day that the apostles were 
su pern a tu rally qualified to preach the gospel to the nations; and 
Simon Peter made it memorable bv his wonderful discourse, 


122 


MACEOCOSMUS. 


which, resulted in the conversion of three thousand persons to 
the Christian faith. Then the Church of God took its origin. 
This alone is sufficient to give divine authority to the Lord’s 
Day. 

4. It was on the first day that Christ met with his disciples 
after his resurrection. This is evident from John xx. 19-29. 
The disciples were assembled on the first day, and Jesus ap¬ 
peared in the midst of them. Thomas was not present at the 
first meeting; so on the first day of the next week w'e find them 
again assembled, Thomas with them, and Jesus appears in their 
midst, and fully satisfies Thomas of his divinity by ocular 
demonstration. This should satisfy every thoughtful person 
that the Lord’s Day is the true Sabbath; and that no one is 
under any obligation to keep the Jewish Sabbath. 

5. It was on the first day of the week that Christ rose from 
the dead, and thus finished the work of a new creation. Under 
the old covenant the seventh day was observed in commemora¬ 
tion of the completion of God’s work of creation ; so under the 
new covenant we observe the Lord’s Day in commemoration of 
the resurrection of Christ, which completed the work of the 
redemption. The resurrection is the last great fact of the gos¬ 
pel, and it is proper that it should be thus commemorated. On 
account of this fact, the first day of the, week is called the 
Lord’s Day (Rev. i. 10). All Christians should remember that 
it is the Lord’s Day, and not the devil’s dav. They should be 
very careful how they conduct themselves on this day. 

SECTION" IV.-THE DESECRATION OF THE LORD*S DAY. 

There are many who would be much offended if you were 
to call them thieves and robbers, still it is a fact that they are 
weekly stealing the time God has appointed for his worship, 
and are robbing the Lord of his dues. The desecration of the 
Sabbath was the ruin of the Jewish nation, and it may be that 
the desecration of the Lord’s Day will be the ruin of our nation. 
Xot long since I visited a. professed Christian family on Mon¬ 
day, and saw cards in the parlor, which suggested to me that 
they had been playing on the Lord’s Day. I understand that 


THE SUNDAY PROBLEM. 


1 O Q 
i -/O 

some professed Christians play progressive euchre on Sunday 
night instead of going to church.. This may partially account 
for some of the city churches having such small audiences on 
Sunday nights.. It may be that the word “progressive” is ap¬ 
propriate before the word “euchre/’ for bv this game many pro¬ 
fessed Christians progress rapidly in the direction of perdition. 
How does it sound for a progressive euchre party to'be an¬ 
nounced at the home of a church deacon ? His home, instead 
of influencing the young in the direction of right, causes them 
to progress in the direction of a gambling-den. 

Hr. J. G. Holland claims that if a man wants to be con¬ 
sidered respectable, he should dress himself and go to church 
at least, once on Sunday. This he claims a man should do for 

t j 

his own improvement, even if he is not a Christian. This 
should put to shame those professed Christians who spend the 
Lord's Day in idleness, and neglect the assembling of them¬ 
selves together. A man who does not worship God is in danger 
of ruin even in this world, for he is sinning against his higher 
nature; but the man or woman who claims to be a Christian 
and desecrates’the Lord’s Day, is rapidly filling up his cup of 
iniquity. What must be the spiritual condition of parents who 
will let their children attend baseball games on the Lord’s L)ay ? 
I am fullv convinced that Sunday desecration is one of the 
greatest evils connected with our modern civilization. 

NOTES. 

L Prof. Herrick Johnson, of Chicago, gave the following 
reasons why the World’s Fair should not be opened on Sunday: 
(I) Opening the gates on Sunday would be contrary to our 
World’s Fair precedents. (2) It would be against the best 
usages and traditions of our national life. (3) It would be 
against the consciences of ten million of church-members. (4) 
It, would be a national humiliation to substitute the national 
European Sunday for our day of rest. (5) Sunday opening 
would be a fearful menace to social order. (G) Sunday open¬ 
ing would set a national precedent, justifying the thrusting 

into Sunday of every kind of entertainment and every sort of 
•/ » 


1 24- 


mac ROCOSM US. 


traffic to hawk its wares. (7) Sunday opening would be taking 
the downgrade fo-r labor, while Europe is just now starting on 
the upgrade. (8) It would be forcing Sunday labor on all em¬ 
ployes of the fair and of the railroads. (9) Sunday opening 
would be another link in the chain to bind labor over to toil 
365 days in the year. (10) Sunday opening would be selling 
the Lord’s Day for a few pieces of silver. 

2. There is a fearful tendency at the present time to spend 
the Lord’s Day in amusement It is said that upon the Con¬ 
tinent of Europe the Lord’s Day appears more like our Fourth 
of duly than our Sunday. It is encouraging, however, to know 
that there is now an upward tendency in Europe. In this coun¬ 
try, the theater is making desperate efforts to invade our Sun¬ 
day. I urge the following objections to all amusements on the 
Lord’s Day, whether the amusement be right or wrong: (1) It 
is the day appointed bv divine authority for worship, and not 
a day for amusement. (2) It is robbing God of his dues not 
to consecrate this day as he has directed. (3) It is sacrilegious 
to spend the Lord’s Day in amusement. (4) It violates the 
law of the land, for the people usually engage in amusements 
condemned by the law if they are disposed to desecrate Sunday. 
(5) Amusements on Sunday tempt the people to violate the 
requirements of the Lord. (6) Sunday amusements make a 
nation ungodly. (7) God created man for a higher purpose 
than simply to be amused. Some amusements are proper at 
proper times, but none are proper on the Lord’s Day. 




CHAPTER V. 

The Problems of the City. 


INTRODUCTION. 

The ministry of Jesus in this world was mostly spent in 
cities. The Book of John is taken up in describing what he 
did and taught at the great national feasts of Jerusalem. Cho- 
razin, Capernaum, and the other cities of Judea and Samaria, 
were the special fields of his labors. When the disciples were 
sent to announce the approach of Jesus, they were sent into 
those cities whither he himself would come; and when thev 
were warned of the persecutions with which they would meet, 
they were told to flee from one city to another. When the great, 
commission was given to the apostles to preach the gospel to 
all nations, they were told to. commence at Jerusalem. We 
learn from the Acts of the Apostles that the cities were the 
places where the apostles spent most of their time. They 
preached the gospel in Jerusalem, Samaria, Antioch, and in 
the great cities of Asia Minor and Europe. It was so impor¬ 
tant that the gospel be preached in Rome, the mistress of the 
world, that the great apostle Paul was chained there two years, 
that he might preach the gospel also in the great city. Dr. 
Talmage says Paul went sight-seeing. Paul evidently enjoyed 
seeing Rome with her wonders; but he went there for a much 
higher purpose than studying Roman art. The noblest letter 
ever penned by man was an address by Paul to the church at 
Rome. 

In Antioch, the third city in the world at that time, tea 
miles in circumference, Paul and Barnabas spent a whole year 
and established a large church. It was there that the disciples 
were first called Christians. The polluted Corinth early re¬ 
ceived the gospel. The seven churches of Asia Minor, addressed 
by Jesus in the Apocalypse, were established at an early date 
by the apostles. Paul spent three years in Ephesus, which con¬ 
tained the great temple of Diana, one of the seven wonders of 


126 


MACKOCOSMtfS. 


the world. Even the literary Athens was entered by the great 
apostle to the Gentiles, who stood where the great philosophers 
and orators of Greece had stood, and there presented the gospel 
to the opposing schools of philosophy. 

The infidel who claims that the gospel first triumphed 
among the ignorant and superstitious, is greatly mistaken, for 
it early triumphed in the great centers of influence. The word 
“pagan” is derived from a Latin word which denotes a village. 
After Christianity had triumphed in the great centers of influ¬ 
ence, paganism lingered in the villages. I will endeavor to give 
a few reasons why the great cities were the first objects of 
attack on the part of the apostles : 

1. Great cities are the centers of wealth. Men with large 
acquisitiveness naturally congregate in large cities in order to 
make money rapidly. They soon gather immense fortunes. As 
their wealth increases, poverty on the part of others also 1 in¬ 
creases. The gospel is greatly needed in large cities to coun¬ 
teract. these tendencies. Wealth, unsanctified by a pure relig¬ 
ion, will ruin any people. The only thing that will ever fully 
solve the problem in reference to labor and capital, is the relig¬ 
ion of Christ. We can not question the fact that God has given 
man the elements of wealth, but these can be greatly perverted. 


Extreme wealth necessarily leads to extreme poverty. The 
Bible condemns both; and happy is the man or nation that finds 
the golden mean between these extremes. The rich man of the 
Bible is an example of the influence of great wealth upon the 
individual; and the Spanish nation is an example of the influ¬ 
ence of great wealth upon the nation. The gold of Mexico and 
Peru reduced Spain from the position of the first nation of 
Europe, to the position of a third-rate power. 

2. I ho city is the center of fashion. There never was a 
tyrant whose commands were more imperious than are those 
of fashion. Many persons live only to watch her nod ; and they 
are more afraid of violating one of her rules than they are 
afraid of violating a command of Christ, The city is the 
home, temple, and the altar of fashion. There she has the 
greatest number of votaries, and there are made her richest 


THE PROBLEMS OF TIIE CITY. 


127 


offerings. \\ it.hout the influence of pure religion, fashion soon 
becomes such a goddess in a great city that she completely cor¬ 
rupts the people. 

d. 1 he city is the center of culture. The most powerful 
minds of a, nation gather in her cities. Questions of vast im¬ 
portance are there discussed, and the best talent is demanded 
in their discussion. The great movements that change the des¬ 
tiny of nations usually take their origin in great cities. We 
are glad that Brazil became a republic without the shedding 
of blood. The movement which made her such took its origin 
in her great metropolis; and it was not difficult to induce the 
provinces to accept the decision of her great city. The most 
important publications, those which influence the whole coun¬ 
try, are sent out from the cities. High culture is, of course, 
necessary to a high civilization; but intellectual culture alone 
is not sufficient. The history of Greece fully establishes the 

truth of this statement. The Christianity of the Bible is essen- 

«/ 

tial to the highest culture, and it is the only culture that will 
save our nation from ruin. 

4. The great cities control the destiny of a nation. "Rome 
not only gave laws to the great empire of which she was the 
capital, but she was, in many respects, the empire itself. When 
the great city sank under the weight of her own sins, the empire 
fell as if it had been struck with lightning. Paris is France, 
and when Paris is Republican, then France is Republican; 

9 when Paris is communistic, then France is communistic. Des¬ 
potism in Paris makes despotism in France. Ro one can think 
of England without thinking of London, its great metropolis. 
The fact can not be questioned that no other spot on earth so 
much needs the gospel as does the city. There may be other 
spots where sweeter dews fall, and where brighter rainbows 
hang, but there is no other spot where demoralization and death 
travel with a greater celerity than in the city. 

ci r d 

SECTION I.-TEMPTATIONS OF THE CITY. 

Tn the following ways the young are specially tempted in 
the citv: 



128 


MACROCOSM US. 


(1) They are strongly tempted to waste their time. Life 
in this world, even if we make the best of it, is exceedingly 
brief. The great object of the present life is to prepare us to 
enter upon the future state to the best possible advantage. In 
order to do that, man must make the very best use of his time 
while here. A great emperor of antiquity, when he had not 
done good to some one during the day, would at night say: 
“I have lost a day.” Jesus taught the importance of working 
during the day, as the night of death would come when man 
could no longer work. The young, especially, in our cities, are 
giving much time to the reading of injurious literature. It is 
not only a waste of time, but also a waste of character, for as 
a man reiadetli so is he. The amusements of a. citv are also 

«y 

temptations for young persons to waste their time and money. 
If these amusements are not demoralizing, they would still b^ 
very injurious on account of the waste of time and money. We 
do not question the fact that some amusements are wholesome, 
and that man can be amused and instructed at the same time: 
but it is still a fact that the multiplicity of amusements in 
our cities are not only a waste of time, but positively injurious 
to the character of the people. It is not necessary to enumer¬ 
ate the abominations so well known at these places of amuse- 
nent. Many parents would be ready to weep tears of blood if 
they knew what pitfalls are placed in the way of their children. 

(2) Young persons in the city are greatly tempted lo 
throw off the parental restraint, and to ignore the Lord’s Day. 
One of the deepest sins in the heart of man is the desire to be 
entirely independent, Tt caused Adam and Eve to desire to 
ho as gods, Tt leads to infidelity by causing man to throw off 
the authority of his Maker. Tt is sad to think how the evil ten¬ 
dencies in society, and especially in the cities, tend to break 
the family tie. Manv voung men, and even some young women, 
trample beneath their ruthless feet the authority of their 
parents. It is said that Lord Byron did not properly respect 
the authority of his mother; but before his death his conscience 
scourged him as with a scorpion lash for his misconduct. The 
name of Benedict Arnold is consigned to eternal disgTaee bv 

o C? i/ 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CITY. 


129 


every writer of American history. He did not become a traitor 
at a. single leap; bnt in his youth his hard-hearted guilt brought 
a widowed mother to her grave. As we discuss Sunday dese¬ 
cration in another chapter, .t is not necessary to> dwell upon it 
at this time. It is, however, one of the greatest evils of the 
age in our great cities. 

(3) The young men in the city are especially tempted to 
sinful pleasures. It requires constant novelty to keep up the 
excitement incidental to city life. One pleasure is resorted to 
until it. becomes tame, and it then gives way to another. Drink¬ 
ing and gambling are special temptations that come to young 
men in the city. Drunkenness is apt to precede almost every 
other vice or crime. You seldom find a gambler wlm is not 
also a drunkard. A desire to get money without earning it 
is a special cause of gambling. All cities generally afford 
ample means for all who want to engage in this degrading vice. 

There are special temptations which come to the business 


man in the citv. 

«j 

(1) The business man is in danger of banishing from his 
mind all sacred things. His companions are, like himself, 
tryine; to make monev; and man is so constituted that he is 

tJ O tJ 7 


greatly affected bv the feelings and pursuits of others. If he 
makes a success of business, and spends part of his time in 
recreation, he is frequently associated with those who have no 
religion except the god of this world. When a man’s attention 
is called to almost everything else except religion, he is very apt 
to forget the true interests of the soul. Man is a social being, 
and when the business man has made plenty of money, if his 
passions are not under proper religious restraint he is in great 
danger of being ruined by the sinful pleasures of this world. 
If the business man will consult his own best interests, he will 
not even for one day neglect the Christianity of the Bible. 

(2) The business man in the city is in great danger of hav¬ 
ing his conscience blunted. There is much said about the nice 
sense of honor among business men; but this frequently means 
nothing more than punctuality in meeting payments, and even 
selfishness would require that much of a business man. To live 


130 


MACROCOSMUS. 


in all good conscience, even in business, requires more than 
this. More frequently is a business man tempted to profess 
that his goods are the best quality in the market, and the 
cheapest, when neither is true. lie claims to sell new goods 
at cost to accommodate his customers, which a sensible man 
knows he can not afford to do. What is greatly needed in 
this age is conscience in business. The tide of misfortune 
sometimes sets up against the best of business 'men. When it 
is understood that they are men of principle, and have been 
thoroughly conscientious in all their dealings, they find friends 
ready and willing to help them turn back the tide of misfor¬ 
tune. 

There are special temptations which come to the Christians 
in the city. 

(1) Christians in the city are in great danger of underes¬ 
timating the guilt of sin. It is a principle of human nature 
that familiarity has a wonderful effect upon the feelings of men. 
The first time the medical student enters the dissecting-room 
his feelings revolt against his work; he is unable to eat, and 
fearful images haunt him for days. But in a few months he 
can attend to his duties in the hospital, and eat his dinner with 
as keen an appetite as if he had been at some interesting place 
of amusement. This illustrates the principle T wish to incul¬ 
cate. A young Christian comes to the city, and lie is shocked 
at what he sees and hears. In a few months he embraces the 

vices and follies that, he was once so readv to condemn. I have 

•/* 

heard country brethren talk against the practices of city 
churches; and have known them to move to the city and become 
ringleaders in the very things they once so bitterly opposed. 

(2) Christians in the city are in great danger of being 
swept away by worldly amusements. Almost every human 
being loves excitement, and that is what worldly amusements 
are designed to produce. Gamblers claim that there is nothing 
else so exciting as the card-table. This is the reason why it 
is so hard to reform a gambler. In the city, worldly amuse¬ 
ments are always on hand, and they are so advertised as fre¬ 
quently to deceive the very elect. Besides this, the most dan- 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CITY. 


131 


gerous vices are licensed in cities, and this fact alone tends to 
make the people look upon them with more favor. The owners 
of these places of wicked amusements are constantly violating 
the laws, and this tends to make the people lawless. The perils 
of the city are almost innumerable. 

SECTION II.-MUNICIPAL MISRULE AND THE REMEDIES. 

It is said that God made the country, but man made the 
city; that things are natural in the country, while they are 
artificial in the city. This is only partially true, for the very 
constitution of man shows that God intended him to build cit¬ 
ies. If the city was not all right in itself, we would not read 
of tho New Jerusalem, the city of God. 

The city is like the ancient shield—while one side is silver, 
the other side is of coarser metal. 


CAUSES OF MUNICIPAL MISRULE. 


1. The liquor traffic is one of the principal causes of munic¬ 
ipal 'misrule. It constantly violates the law, and it is one of 
the greatest educators in lawlessness. It is also a fact that 
many of our cities are largely under the control of the liquor 
traffic. The saloon element has become organized, and it is 
thoroughly despotic and satanic. It has become a great, polit¬ 
ical instrument, and many politicians will yield to its demand- 
in order to obtain votes. It is an uncompromising enemy to 
all free institutions, and will certainly ruin our country if it 


is not put down by the iron heel of government The methods 
of tho saloon are in harmony with the character of the institu¬ 
tion. It does not hesitate to use dynamite when it will sub¬ 
serve its purposes. 1 ho saloon element blew up a church in 
Ohio, because a lecturer was denouncing the evils of the liquor 
traffic. An editor was shot in Mississippi and the noble Had¬ 
dock was killed in Iowa, because of their opposition to the 
saloon interest. I his ruinous traffic is rapidly cony citing oui 


cities into Sodoms. 

2. The rapid growth of cities. The tendencies of the peo¬ 
ple to go to the city are observed by every student of history. 




MACROCOSMUS. 


132 

Nineveh, Babylon and Rome are only illustrations of a ten¬ 
dency to congestion of populations in large cities. The wicked¬ 
ness of these cities had much to do with the overthrow of the 
great kingdoms of which they were the capitals. We observe 
the same tendency in modern times among all nations of the 
world. The city problem, then, becomes one of the most im¬ 
portant of problems. The growth of the city is so rapid and 
the people so restless, that it is difficult to properly train them 
in self-government. 

3. The wicked class rapidly congregate in the city. In 
the great seaports the vices of the world are concentrated; and 
in this age of railroads these vices are rapidly transmitted to 
the inland towns and cities. While we quarantine against for¬ 
eign diseases, we have no quarantine against foreign vices. Sin 
grows rapidly; so the city soon becomes the center of prosti¬ 
tution, gambling and all other forms of iniquity. 

4. The foreign element in our cities is frequently very diffi¬ 
cult to control. Many who land upon our shores, think that 
liberty means license to vices of every character. They do not 

*/ *J «/ 

feel the restraints of law that tliev felt in their own country. 
They understand neither our language nor our institutions, and 
easily become a. prey to the most reckless demagogues. While 
we welcome good people from all parts of the world, we cer¬ 
tainly need protection from the pauper and vicious classes. 

5. Our great cities are the centers of political corruption. 
It is not surprising that Dr. Parkhurst has created such a 
sensation in New York, for this great city is as wicked as was 
Babylon in the days of Belshazzar. In some cities even the 
police belong to the vicious classes, which is much like the 
story of dogs selecting wolves to guard the sheep. It is said 
that in one of our cities, at an important election, at least 
twenty thousand good citizens failed to register, while the vilest 
element in the city appeared in full force. The good citizens, 
in reply to those who blamed them, claimed that the registra¬ 
tion lists had for vears been used by the wicked classes for 
fraudulent purposes. The judges appointed to supervise a re¬ 
cent city election have all been criminals. The primary elec- 


I 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CITY. 133 

lions in many ol our cities are frequently held in saloons; 
and city governments are too often run in the interest of the 
liquor traffic. 

THE REMEDIES FOR MUNICIPAL MISRULE. 

1. The abolition of the saloon is an important remedy. The 
saloon has a close relationship to anarchy, and there can be no 
proper respect for law where it has the control. It is a shock¬ 
ing monster, and devours all who come in contact with it. It 
tills the land with mourning, and the grave with drunkards. 
When it pleads for personal liberty, it means liberty to destroy 
the bodv and soul of man. If any monster deserves death for 
his crimes, it is certainly the ruinous liquor traffic. Let all 
good citizens do what they can to destroy the saloon, and its 
destruction will largely solve the problem of city government. 

2. .V proper restriction of foreign immigration is an import¬ 
ant element in the solution of the problem. It is a mistake 
for vfcious characters to be permitted to go from city to city, 
much more from country to countrv. One citv will quarantine 
against the diseases of another, and would it not be well for it 
to quarantine against the vices of another ? I am cosmopoli¬ 
tan in my principles, and welcome true men and women from 
all countries; but thieves and robbers and anarchists and such 

should not be admitted into this free countrv. In some cases 

»/ 

foreign countries send their criminals to the United States. 
It is said that the Danish Government some time ago par¬ 
doned a, notorious forger on condition that he would come to 
this country. The Canadians are vigorous in their protest 
against the policy of receiving .criminals from Europe; and 
the time has come for our Government to adopt a more rigor¬ 
ous policy. It is true that we have some kind of investiga¬ 
tion at Castle Garden, but it is largelv a farce. Our Govern- 
ment can not become in earnest on this question too soon. 

3. There must be reform on the part of municipal authori¬ 
ties, or the city will rapidly go to ruin. In fact, the whole 
country must return from the Jacksonian spoils system to the 
policy of Jefferson and Washington. Civil service reform is 


I 


MACBOCOSMUS. 


134 

certainly needed, and as population increases, our cities will be 
ungovernable without it. Ponder well the following lines of 
Lowell: 

“The world turns mild. Democracy, they say, 

Rounds the sharp knobs of character away. 

The ten commandments had a meaning once, 

Felt in their bones by least considerate men, 

Because behind them public conscience stood, 

And without wincing made their mandates good. 

But now that statesmanship is just a way 
To dodge the primal curse, and make it pay; 

Since office means a kind of patent drill 
To force an entrance to the nation’s till; 

And peculation something rather less 
Risk than if you spelt it with an S; 

Now that to steal by law is grown an art, 

Whom rogues the sires, their milder sons call smart.” 

4. Illiteracy 'must be banished from our cities. Ignorance 
is a sign of darkness; and corrupt political leaders make the 
very best use of this darkness. If it were not for the igno- 
ranee of the people, they could not accomplish their selfish 
schemes. Illiteracy is an enemy to all progress, and we should 
rapidly banish it by pouring in the light of true civilization. 
Our public schools, which are the best in the world, are doing 
much towards solving our most difficult problems. As we will 
discuss this subject in another chapter, it is not necessary to 
say more just here. 

5. The proper presentation of the gospel will do more to 
counteract the evil tendencies of the citv than anything else. 
The success of Dr. Thomas Chalmers in the city of Edinburgh 
is an illustration of this fact. Edinburgh, at that time, was 
an extremely wicked city, and the crimes committed in it 
shocked all Europe. Dr. Chalmers planted missions in the 
very centers of wickedness; and there are vet in Edinburgh 
self-supporting churches which grew out of those missions. 
Christians are not half in earnest in this matter. They work 
on Sunday, and the devil works all the week. A properly 
united Christian effort would soon banish from our cities many 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CITY. 


135 


of their vices and crimes. While General Booth’s scheme is 
to some extent- Utopian, still it is worthy of attention* as it 
applies many Christian principles to the solution of the city 
problem. I am especially pleased with the Farm Colony idea, 
and also with the plan of planting colonies over the sea. There 
is plenty of room in this world for its inhabitants if they could 
be properly distributed. "There is land enough for all; and the 
unemployed in our cities should be colonized where they could 
cultivate the land. God intends all men to work, and it is the 
duty of Christians to guide in the pathway of success those 
who are not able to guide themselves. Goodnow’s two interest¬ 
ing volumes, and Shaw’s two equally interesting volumes, show 
marvelous municipal reform in Europe during the past quar¬ 
ter of a century. It is evident, also, that great progress is now 
being made in America. Our great cities will be redeemed 
bv our Christian civilization. The cities of the world are now 
better prepared for the missionary than ever before. Through 
the cities the nations will yet be redeemed. 


CHAPTER VI. 

The Problem of Education. 

On the subject of education'men have always been learning; 
but they have not yet come to a full knowledge of the truth. 
The antediluvians had their ideas on the subject, and some of 
them made considerable progress in education. At an early 
period the Egyptians became an educated people, and they ap¬ 
pear to have had very correct ideas in reference to methods of 
instruction. They had their exoteric and esoteric schools. In 
the one they fitted men for the common duties of life; in the 
other, for governmental and sacerdotal pursuits. 

The moderns are surprised at the advancement which the 
ancient Chinese made in education. Centuries before the 
Christian era they had published books, and were an educated 
people. They thoroughly tested a man’s qualifications for 
office before he could become a candidate. If he failed in his 
examinations, he could hold no official position in China. Tt 
would be well for this country to take at least one lesson from 
China. That the Greeks had very correct methods of instruct¬ 
ing, is shown in the fact that no other country has produced 
such artists, such philosophers and such orators as were pro¬ 
duced in ancient Greece. The Romans may have surpassed 
them in jurisprudence, but in everything else they were far 
inferior. 

The public schools of this country have received so much 
praise abroad that we have all become proud of our institu¬ 
tions. One mistake, however, has been made in nearly all the 
public as well as private schools of the country. The god of 
ambition has received too much homage. The motto of the 
schools has largely been that there is nothing impossible to 
him who wills; that where there is a will, there is a way. This 
is frequently so taught as to make it a positive falsehood. All 
the youths in the land may will to become- Presidents of the 
Union, and but few can possibly succeed. Every old bumpkin 

1S6 


TILE PROBLEM OF EDUCATION. 


IQ 1 ? 

lo i 

in the land who goes from school house to school house for the 
purpose of making speeches, has something to say in favor of 
the god of ambition. Longfellow’s beautiful quatrain stanza 
is upon almost every lip— 

“Lives of great men all remind us, 

We can make our lives sublime. 

And, departing, leave behind us 
Footprints on the sands of time.” 

• Let a young boy of this age go fifty years from this time 
to the cemeteries, and see how many of those who have repeated 
the stanza have left footprints on the sands of time. But few 
who are now living will ever be thought of one hundred years 
from this time, except by intimate family friends. 

These erroneous views of education, which are constantly 
being inculcated, are causing persons to- seek positions for which 
they have no qualifications. Visit a State Legislature, and you 
will understand me. Xot. one in ten of the whole number pos¬ 
sesses the proper qualifications to make laws for the State, and 
half of them never studied the Constitution. It is sad to* think 
of the number of doctors, lawyers and preachers who are a dis¬ 
grace to their professions and a curse to the country. Men 
must get rid of the idea that none need an education except 
those who intend to adopt a profession. A farmer should have 
as much use for science as a lawyer. Education qualifies a 
man better for any duty in life. In fact, God gave man his 
faculties to be developed, and if man neglects this important 
duty, he fails to accomplish the great object of his mission. 

SECTION I.-THE SCIENCE OF EDUCATION. 

Education is both a science and an art. As a science, it 
treats of the laws pertaining to the development of the human 
mind; and as an art, it makes a practical application of these 
laws. In education, as well as in other things, the theory and 
the practice should harmonize. There should never be any 
conflict between the science and art of education. 

In treating of the science of education, it is necessary to be 
exact in definition. Mr. Bain is a very eminent writer on this 


188 


MACROCOSM US. 


subject, but he is too narrow in his views. He, like Mr. Huxley, 
places too much stress on physical science, and neglects to a 
very great extent moral and religious culture. Man is so con¬ 
stituted that physical science will run away with him if moial 
culture is neglected. It is like the fiery steed without the guid¬ 
ance of a good rider. The best intellectual culture in the world 
will not keep the student out of the bar-room, and from other 
places that tend to complete demoralization. Take the great 
universities, and many of their most intellectual students are 
ruined by dissipation. It is an admitted fact that many of the 
leading men of the nation, and some of the most influential 
statesmen, are complete slaves to ruinous habits. What is their 
great need? More intellectual culture? Some writers seem to 
think so, but it is not true. Their great need is moral and 
religious culture. They should have had more of this in col¬ 
lege, and, possibly, they would not have gone astray. The 
intellectual culture of the Greeks was not sufficient to save 
them from deteriorating tendencies. They have been largely 
the intellectual teachers of the world for more than two thou¬ 
sand years, but their intellectual greatness could not save their 
nation from ruin. 

We do not consider any definition of education complete 
which ignores the religious element in man’s nature. This ele¬ 
ment is just as natural, and as capable of scientific treatment, 
as any other part of the constitution of man. What good sense 
can there be in subjecting the lowest part of man’s nature to 
scientific treatment, and ignoring the very highest capacity of 
his nature? It is the same as attaching more importance to 
the horse than to the rider. This is, doubtless, done at horse¬ 
races, but even there the success of the race largely depends 
upon the careful training and skill of the rider. Tn life, noth¬ 
ing can be accomplished with the horse without the skill of 
man. Tn the progress of civilization, nothing can be truly ac¬ 
complished without the guiding star of moral principle. 

We are much pleased with the ideas of education presented 
bv the founders of the Prussian national svstem. Thev include 


THE PROBLEM OF EDUCATION. 


130 


the cultivation of all the powers of the human soul. In true 
education, there must be proper physical, intellectual and moral 
development, 1 here is such an intimate relation between the 
mind and the body that a healthy body is necessary to a sound 
mind. The mind also greatly influences the body; so that they 
should be educated together. There is certainly no conflict 
between physiology and psychology. The intellect and the con¬ 
science have such a reciprocal relation that neither can be per¬ 
fectly healthy without the proper culture of the other. We 
may, therefore, conclude that God intends man to be educated, 
body, soul and spirit 

While I emphasize the importance of a complete psychol¬ 
ogy, I do not wish you to understand that I in any sense under¬ 
estimate the importance of physiology. The art of education 
requires good physical health, for the man with a weak body 
is apt to have something weak in his thought. There was a 
time when students were literally starved on the supposition 
that they could study better on an empty stomach. It is doubt¬ 
less true that a. person can not study well, and digest a great 
amount of food at the same time. A glutton never makes a 
good student. But still, the body and the brain require food, 
and the brain can not properly act without a sufficient amount 
of good nourishment from the body. Much attention should be 
given bv educators to the selection of good, wholesome food for 
students. Bodily health is at the foundation of all true educa¬ 
tion, and physiology and hygiene should he studied at an early 
period in the history of the student. 

The human body has a great aggregate of organs—digestion, 
respiration, muscles, senses, brain. The organs generally suffer 
when fatigue overtakes them; and when renovation sets in, the 
organs are invigorated. Human beings are very differently 
constituted as regards the different functions; for some are 
specially strong in stomach, others in muscle, and still others 
in brain. Tn all such cases the favored organs receive the 
' largest, proportion of invigoration. a To him that hath, shall 
be given.” The organ that happens to l>e the most active at 


140 


MACROCOSMUS. 


the time receives more than its share; so that to exercise the 
organs unequally is to nourish them unequally. 

It is, then, very necessary, in order to increase the plastic 
property of the mind, to nourish the brain. This is done when 
the body is nourished, if there are no exorbitant demands made 
on the part of other organs. If the digestion or muscles arc 
unduly drawn upon, the brain will not respond to the demands 
made upon it. On the other hand, if the brain is too much 
excited, it will receive more than its share, and the other func¬ 
tions will suffer. 

There is a wide difference between the intellectual and emo¬ 
tional functions of the mind. Great emotional excitement is 
hostile to the greatest intellectual achievement. The same can 
be said of too much intellectual application—it has a tendency 
to impair the emotions. Some of the presidents of our great 
colleges are about as dry in a sermon or lecture as the xnost 
stoical could demand. In religion, some persons are all emotion 
and no intellect; and others are all intellect and no emotion. 
True religion, as well as true education, requires the proper 
•medium. It has its emotional element, and also requires knowl¬ 
edge as well as grace. We should never lose sight of the golden 
mean. 

The science of education requires a. thorough study of 
human nature. Some think that this can not be done except 
by constantly croAvding among men. It is certainly important 
to mingle with men; but many do this, and do not get a knowl¬ 
edge of human nature. They get a knoAvledge of business, but 
do not study the very soul of man. To get at the very con¬ 
science of the people requires deep study. Jonathan Edwards 
possessed much knowledge of human nature, yet lie seldom 
moved among men. lie might have made a mistake in pur¬ 
chasing a horse, but not in judging the principles of men’s ac¬ 
tions. Mr. Edwards, however, Avould have corrected some great 
mistakes in his philosophy if he had mingled more with men. 
Let us aA T oid extremes. All of us should study human nature 

carefully, not to find fault with our fellows—for A\ T e can crener- 

© 


THE PROBLEM OF EDUCATION. 


141 


ally find some good in men—but we should study to improve 
ourselves., and advance the interest of others. Let us do' good. 

SECTION II.-IMPORTANT FACTS IN THE HISTORY OF EDUCATION. 

So far as possible, we like to study all subjects according to 
the inductive method. In this section, we wish to present some 
important facts in the history of education, so that the reader 
'may be able to dra-w wise conclusions for himself. This is 
really the only safe way to reach the solution of any problem. 

Education took its origin in the early history of the race; 
for Adam and Eve are the only examples we have of persons 
placed in this world full grown at the beginning. They so 
poorly conducted themselves that God saw proper to have their 
children educated. 

In the education of mankind the instincts were, of course, 
first developed. The body had to be protected from atmospheric 
changes, so clothing had to be provided. The skins of wild 
beasts seemed necessary for this purpose. It was necessary next 
to provide shelter from the scorching sun and soaking rains. 
For this purpose, booths were made from branches of trees, and 
huts from their trunks. For the convenience of the shepherd 
and herdsman the tent was next invented. The next in order 
would naturally be the domestication of some of the animals, 
and means of protecting them from beasts of prey; and for this 
protective purpose, weapons were made of iron or copper even 
before the Xoachian Deluge. 

In the seventh generation from Adam the intellectual taste 
began to be cultivated, for we learn that the love,of music Ed 
Tubal to invent the lyre and Pandean pipe. The Hebrew writ¬ 
ers do not give us much information concerning the further 
progress of the antediluvians in the arts and sciences; but we 
learn that they had some ideas of architecture, and some knowl¬ 
edge of the use of tools, for the construction of the ark would 
imply this. The language of the original also implies that there 
was means of transmitting light to the interior of this great 
structure. The Avord translated “windows” convevs the ideas of 
brilliancy and transparency. This was probably some membra- 



142 


MACROCOSM US. 


nous substances, or possibly mica, but its use indicated consider¬ 
able progress from the savage state. We have reason to believe 
that the descendants of Seth had made somewhat rapid progress 
in religious culture even in antediluvian times. 

The distinction made between the sacrifices of Gain and 
Abel is an evidence in itself of extended religious knowledge. 
The lamb that was offered indicated a knowledge of its typical 
character, and faith in the Lamb of God which it represented. 
The high religious character of’ Enoch is an example for all 
ages. He was a man who walked with God, and his fidelity 
caused Jehovah to bestow upon him an exceptional favor. 

The gigantic crimes which led to the Deluge do not imply 
a want of intellectual culture, for analogy teaches us that some 
of the most intellectual nations have been the most wicked. We 
believe it to be a fact that high intellectual attainments, when 
unrestrained by religion, are productive of infidelity and crime. 

Manv of the 'most intellectual students of Eastern universities 

«/ 

delight in boasting of their skepticism, and even in some cases 
of their loose moral principles. They seem to think that these 
things elevate them above the rest of mankind. 

We now pass to education in post-diluvian times, concerning 
which we have more denite information than we have of ante¬ 
diluvian education. At first the descendants of Noah settled 
on the fertile plains between the Tigris and Euphrates; but in 
the course of a few centuries sent forth colonies to Egypt, Ethi¬ 
opia, China.and India. Some of these, in a short time, went 
far beyond their ancestors in intellectual development. 

One of the earliest, if not the first, of the nations was the 
Egyptian kingdom. Her monuments clearly teach that at a 
very early period she reached quite a high civilization. Egypt 
has always been cursed with divisions of caste, and the lines of 
demarcation are so great that the lowest caste is reduced to the 
'most abject slavery. Among the ancient Egyptians there were 
three privileged classes; viz.: priests, warriors and professional 
men. The priests really controlled the nation, although the 
monarch was selected from the warrior class. Education was 
mostly bestowed upon these three classes. They had two courses 


THE PROBLEM OF EDUCATION. 


14J3 


of study, one called exoteric and the other esoteric. The esoteric 
course was for the highest class, and pertained to the sacred 
writings of the nation. We learn from the monuments that the 
Egyptians were proficient in arithmetic, geometry and astron- 
omy. They also gave much attention to architecture, sculpture 
and painting. Their artistic achievements were wonderful, but 
their art perished with the despotism that gave it birth. The 
Egyptians in their early history took a good deal of interest in 
the education of their women. This had much to do with the 
high civilization to which the ancient Egyptians attained. 

The Chinese were among the early pioneers of education. 
The exact period when this nation emerged from barbarism, if 
indeed it Was ever barbarian, is uncertain, as its early history 
is very much involved in mystery. It was not, however, much 
behind the Egyptian nation. The most renowned sage -among 
the Chinese was Confucius. In fact, he was one of the greatest 
men of the past. ITe so impressed his personality upon his na¬ 
tion that he is yet regarded as their great teacher. ITe did not, 
however, claim to have originated the doctrines which he 
taught; but insisted that his mission was to revive the teaching 
of the ancient sages, which had fallen into- desuetude. The 
course of instruction in China is verv thorough, and Chinese 
students have to pass very rigid examinations. If one is found 
cheating, he is disgraced forever. The Chinese might teach 
even American universities a lesson along this line. Ho one 
without passing the requisite examinations can hold official posi¬ 
tion in China. One cause of the stability of the Chinese Gov- 

tj 

ernment is the fact that it is based upon education. There is 
no other nation which equals China, in this respect except Prus¬ 
sia. The Chinese make good students. A few years ago I saw 
two Chinamen in the Senior Class at Yale, and President Por¬ 
ter claimed that they were among his best students. 

Our information is scanty concerning education among the 
ancient Babylonians and Assyrians. Some information, how¬ 
ever, is derived from the explorations of Bawl in son, Layard 
and others. From the Book of Daniel we learn that there ex¬ 
isted a class of wise men called Chaldeans; and from other 


144 


MACROCOSMUS. 


sources wo understand that they were proficient in chemistry, 
astrology and other mystic arts. They were always trying to 
pry into the future*, and the prophetical reputation of the He¬ 
brews is evidently the reason why Daniel and his companions 
were educated in all the learning of the Chaldeans. The re¬ 
mains which explorers have found in Xineveh and Babylon 
testify to the fact that they had attained to a high degree of 
civilization seven or eight, centuries after the Flood. They had 


palaces and temples covered with inscriptions in cuneiform 
characters, Mr. Loftus discovered bank notes in the form of 
clay tablets. They had a complex mode of numeration, reck¬ 
oning by tens and by sixties, and their skill in sculpture, archi¬ 
tecture and horticulture has greatly astonished the modern 


world. 

The Persians were an intellectual people when they con¬ 
quered Babylon; but they also appropriated Babylonian knowl¬ 
edge, and became a renowned people. Zoroaster was their great 
teacher. He belonged to the sect of Magi, which retained only 
the use of fire as the symbol of their deity. They were more in 
sympathy with the Jews than was any other nation, and Cyrus, 
the Persian, gave orders for the restoration of the Jews to their 
native land. Xenophon gives us a very interesting picture of 
Persian education during the youth of Cyrus. The population 
was divided into four orders according to age: (1) The boys 
under seventeen; (2) the youths from seventeen to twentv- 
seven; (3) mature men from twenty-seven to fifty-two; (4) old 
men 'more than fifty-two years of age. Their system of educa¬ 
tion included a noble and courageous character, and ingratitude 
was regarded as the basest, of crimes. The Persians, however, 
utterly neglected female education, and the wife was the slave 
of her husband. Every morning she had to kneel at his feet and 
ask nine times the following question: “What do vou wish that. 
I should do?” With such utter neglect of woman’s education, 
it is not surprising that the Persian system was incapable of 
saving a nation from deterioration and ruin. 

Apart from the question of inspiration, the Hebrews pro¬ 
duced the greatest literature of ancient times. The beauty and 


TILE PROBLEM OF EDUCATION. 


145 


grandeur of the first chapter of Genesis, of the Psalms, of the 
Book of Job, and of the prophetic books, far surpass those of 
any other literature of antiquity. Solomon, who was educated 
entirely in his own country, was the wisest of men, and he mani¬ 
fested a knowledge of science and art far in advance of that 
possessed by adjacent nations. We learn from I. Kings iv. 33, 
that “he spake of trees from the cedar-tree that is in Lebanon 
even to the hyssop that springeth out of the wall; he spake also 
of beasts, and of fowls, and of creeping things, and of fishes.’’ 
Every young man among the Hebrews had to be taught a trade 
or some other honest occupation. That would not be a bad law 
in this country. Woman among the Hebrews was better edu¬ 
cated, and occupied a much higher social position, than she did 
among the surrounding nations. 

We now call attention to the educational system of the peo¬ 
ple whose influence has been felt by all intellectual persons for 
twenty-five centuries. Greece has doubtless exerted more influ¬ 
ence since her decadence than she did when she was the first 
nation of the world in arms as well as intellectual culture. The 
heroic age of the Greeks is represented by the great Homer. He 
stands at the head of Epic poets, and is considered the greatest 
genius that lias ever lived. The second period of Greek edu¬ 
cation is represented by Lycurgus, Solon and Pythagoras, and 
embraces more than two hundred and fifty years ; viz.: from 77*3 
B. C. to 520 B. C. Lycurgus and Solon were eminent law¬ 
givers, and Pythagoras was One of the greatest philosophers of 
ancemt times. Although Solon and Lycurgus have been noted 
as lawgivers, they sanctioned many things positively immoral 
and cruel. One central idea of their system ovas that the child 
did not belong to the parents, but to the state. Hence, officers 
of the state inspected it at birth, and, if it was sickly, it was 
not permitted to live. They did not understand the proper 
relationship of the state to the family. 

The man who merits the name of greatest educator among 
the Greeks was the philosopher Socrates. We have yet a method 
of instruction called the Socratic method. Socrates was not a 
writer, and his philosophy can only be understood by a careful 


146 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


study of the writings of his great pupil, Plato. Even then, it 
is sometimes difficult to tell how much is Socratic and hew 
much Platonic. Aristotle was the disciple of Plato, and the 
greatest naturalist of ancient times. Tie was the preceptor of 
Alexander the Great, and Alexander always entertained the 
highest regard for his distinguished teacher. 

In Greek education we find the following facts prominent: 

(1) Education was strictly considered an affair of the state; 

(2) it was chiefly designed to prepare men for soldiers; (3) 
all women, except courtesans, were left uneducated; (4) moral 
culture was almost entirely neglected; (5) there was no educa¬ 
tion for the poor. It is not difficult to see why even the greatest 
intellectual nation could not stand, when women and the masses 
were left uneducated and moral culture largely neglected. 

The Pomans do not appear to have entertained the idea that 
it Avas the duty of the state to educate its citizens. In the early 
history of Pome, education was almost entirely domestic, and 
the intellectual element was extremely scanty. The father pos¬ 
sessed absolute authority over the family, even to the taking of 
life. It is said that sons would sometimes become, slaves to 
escape the tyranny of their fathers. While the father had to 
be regarded with great respect, it was seldom that- sons had 
that affection for their fathers that is manifested by sons in 
modern times. 

The Latin word pietas , which, expresses the reverence of the 
child for its parents, does not imply very much love. The Po¬ 
mans did not neglect physical training, and moral culture was 
carried to a higher degree of perfection by them than by any 
other ancient nation except the Hebrews. Physical and moral 
culture was at the foundation of Rome’s greatness. While 
Pome by her arms conquered Greece, Greek literature intellec¬ 
tually conquered Rome. The vanquished became the teachers 
of the conquerors. Before this the Romans had delighted more 
in blood and less in beauty; more in facts and less in specula¬ 
tion; more in the real and dess in the ideal. Tt was not until 
the hard and coarse Roman character was modified bv the 

i/ 

wealth and luxury of the conquered provinces that the Roman 


THE PROBLEM OF EDUCATION. 


147 


took kindly to the aesthetic culture of the Greeks. They then 
became the imitators of Greek culture. Nearly all the great 
literary men of Home were educated in Greece. Cicero, Virgil 
and Horace received each a Greek education, and manifest, per¬ 
haps unconsciously, their indebtedness to Grecian scholars. It 
must, however, be admitted that the Romans, in some respects, 
surpassed all others in architecture. Their buildings were won¬ 
derful for solidity, grace and durability. The Romans were 
also the lawyers of the ancient world, and doubtless surpassed 
all others in jurisprudence. The later Roman poets differ from 
the Greeks in the unblushing license and obscenity of their lan- 
guage, which would have rendered their writings highly offen¬ 
sive to the aesthetic taste of the Greeks. 

We have considered the influence of some of the great lights 
of antiquity upon education. But none of these produced even 
a one-hundredth part of the change in the controlling motive: 
of men and nations which was the result of the teachings of the 
founder of Christianity. There were radical differences in the 
character of their instruction and that of Christ, They dealt 
only with the words and outward conduct of their disciples; he, 
with the thoughts and intents of the heart. Thev recommended 
virtue from the consideration of policy; he, as the natural mani¬ 
festation of a. heart filled with love to God and our fellow-men. 
They withheld instruction from the poor and lowly; he recog¬ 
nized it as the birthright of every son and daughter of Adam. 
They, for the most part, excluded women from education and 
that social position which she was by the Creator designed to 
adorn; Christ honored woman in all the relations of life, and 
opened wide the door of instruction to her. The great teachers 
of antiquity made no provisions for the poor, the suffering and 
the enslaved; Christ regarded the comfort and relief of these 
as a special part of his mission. With principles so far superior 
to those of all other teachers, it is not surprising that the results 
cf the predominance of Christianity should have been such as 
to revolutionize all former systems of education. Nothing but 
the willfulness, ignorance and perversity of human nature has 
prevented the complete development of Christian principles. 


\ 


148 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


Jesus spent three years and a half teaching men. He traveled 
over Judea and Galilee and taught the people in parables, taken 
either from nature or from the customs of the Jews. Xo one 
else ever succeeded in teaching in parables as did Jesus. It is 
true that the parabolic style was known in his day; but he alone 
carried it to perfection. 

The apostles of Christ taught the precepts of their Master. 
Socrates wrote nothing, but his instructions are preserved by 
bis pupil Plato; Jesus did not write even his own precepts, but 
left them to be transcribed by his disciples under the influence 
of the Holy Spirit. The disciples taught the duty of parents 
to educate their children. Timothy was brought up in the way 
in which he should go, and when he reached maturity lie did 
not depart from it. Education and the Christian religion should 
never be separated. The great truths of the Bible should be 
taught in our schoolrooms. All denominational peculiarities 
should, of course, be excluded, but the grand principles of the 
Bible, which are at the foundation of the highest morality, 
should be carefuly impressed upon the minds of the young. Xo 
one can oppose the reading of the Bible in our public schools 
who is not an ignoramus in either the science of education or 
the principles of Christianity. A lien Constantine made Chris¬ 
tianity the religion of the Boman Empire, there was a great 
impetus given to the cause of education. Schools sprang up in 
all parts of the empire, and there was a greater attendance upon 
the schools already established. Alien the empire was divided, 
the western empire suffered greatly from the incursions of the 
northern barbarians. The monstrous Goth and the fierce Hun 
finally intruded themselves into Rome itself. It is hardly nec¬ 
essary to state that these savage barbarians greatly impeded the 
progress of education. 

The eastern empire was much more fortunate than the 
western. The sciences and arts were cultivated in the eastern 
provinces long after barbarianism had overspread the western 
provinces. Greek culture held its sway with a wonderful te¬ 
nacity upon the eastern mind, and it upheld the decaving Bv- 
zantine Empire for centuries. It kept the lamp of learning 


THE PROBLEM OF EDUCATION. 


149 


continually burning during those ages which were so 1 dark in 
western Europe. 

The transition from the Dark Ages to modern culture was 
brought about by certain important events: (1) The spirit of 
chivalry which elevated women was greatly beneficial to the 
cause of education. The higher the position which woman 
socially occupies, the greater will be the interest the people will 
take in intellectual culture. (2) The Crusades brought the 
western mind in contact with eastern culture, which greatly 
promoted intellectual development in Europe. There was a re¬ 
vival in classic literature; and the Greek and Roman classics 
were studied in the schools of Italy and France. (3) The in¬ 
vention O'f printing and the mariner’s compass could not fail to 
advance the already strong intellectual tendency. (4) The dis¬ 
covery of America continued to expand the human mind, and 
it introduced into Europe the learning of Peru and Mexico. 
(5) The Lutheran Reformation has, doubtless, done as much in 
advancing the cause of education as any other event in modern 
times. (6) The inductive method of Lord Bacon superseded 
the dogmatic method of the schoolmen, and it has resulted in 
some of the most important inventions of modern times. 

Germany and England are now the nations of Europe which 
take the lead in intellectual progress. Italy and France have 
accomplished much in the past, but their educational systems 
are too exclusive in character to compare with those of the de¬ 
termined Englishman and persistent German. The man who 
has exerted more influence over education than any other man 
for more than a century is J. II. Pestalozzi. The Prussian 
system is built upon his method. lie insisted that education 
should be according to nature; that it was the duty of the teacher 
to excite the student to self-activity, and render him only a 
limited degree of assistance; that progress should be gradual 
and uninterrupted; that all the faculties of the mind should be 
developed in harmony. This system has been very successful 
in the Prussian schools, and it is carefully followed in the Ger¬ 
man universities. These universities do not use text-books as 
used in this country, but, by lecturing, the professors try to 


150 


MACROCOSMUS. 


stimulate the students to investigate for themselves. The Pes- 
talozzian method has been somewhat modified in England, but 
it has in that country wielded a very great influence. While 
church divisions have much interfered with primary education 
in England, the English universities are unsurpassed by any in 
the world. While Oxford and Cambridge have in the past given 
too exclusive attention to classical studies, and the University 
of London lias made the same mistake in reference to scientific 
study, these universities, as now reformed, ex-President White, 
of Cornell University, believes will surpass even the German 
universities. 

Our Puritan forefathers were among the best educated men 
in England, so they came to this country well prepared in mind 
as in body to be the forerunners of a great nation. Even in the 
seventeenth century, the Massachusetts colony had compulsory 
education. Every settlement with fiftv inhabitants had to have 
its school, and the children were required to attend it. Every 
village with one hundred inhabitants was required to have its 
grammar school, where Greek and Latin were taught. The dis¬ 
cipline of these schools was very severe, possibly too much so, 
but it must be admitted that it was better than the lax discipline 
found at. the present time in too many schools. The moral part 
of the children’s education was not neglected, and those guiltv 

cj / O 1/ 

of profanity did not have to be corrected by the teacher more 
than once. 

In 1G36 the colony of Massachusetts appropriated one thou¬ 
sand dollars for the founding of a college, to which John Har¬ 
vard added two thousand, and it was called for him, Harvard 
College, Thus there was established within eighteen years after 
the first settlers landed upon Plymouth Rock a college, whose 
reputation has increased from that day to this. These early 
settlers took so much interest in education that those who were 
able to do no more, contributed one peck of corn a year for the 
support of Harvard College. 

The colony of Connecticut, though impoverished by repeated 
Indian wars, considered that the interest of education and relig¬ 
ion required the founding of another college. Thus Yale Col- 


THE PROBLEM OF EDUCATION. 


151 


lege was founded at Hlew Haven, and one hundred and fifty 
dollars was given it per annum out of the colonial treasury. 
\ ale yet stands next to Harvard as one of the greatest colleges 
in America. 

1 he other English colonies did not make that progress in 


education that was made by the Hew England colonies. A 
Latin school was opened in the city of Hew York in 1687 under 
the sanction of the English Government; but there was no pro¬ 
vision made by the colonial government for education until the 
early part* of the eighteenth century. A grammar school was 
established in Hew \ork in 1701, and the Legislature appro¬ 
priated one hundred and fifty dollars per annum for its sup¬ 
port for a limited time. During the seventeenth century the 
colonies of Virginia, Pennsylvania, and the Carolinas did but 
little for the cause of education. A few schools were estalr 
lished for the children of the wealthier planters, but no system 
of general education was thus far provided. 

While Mexico and South American states are far behind 
in education, Canada and the United States well keep pace with 
the most enlightened nations of Europe. The schools of Can¬ 
ada are good, even from the common school to the university. 


McGill University, at Montreal, will compare favorably with 
European colleges. In 1879 I had the privilege of visiting 
McGill University. I was surprised at the educational advan¬ 
tages that institution affords. Dr. Dawson, then its principal, 
was one of the most distinguished scientists in the world. The 
public school system in the United States is evidently the best 
in the world; and our universities in a few years will doubt- 

y *J 


less afford nearly all the advantages found in the great German 
and English universities. 

In concluding this chapter, I wish to emphasize the follow¬ 
ing facts: 

1. The science and history of education clearly teach that 


the family, the church and the state have each its part in ad¬ 
vancing the highest and truest culture. When anv one of these 

o O t 

is excluded, there has always been deficiency either in the gen- 
eral application of the system, or in not completely developing 


152 


MACROCOSMUS. 


all the faculties of the human mind. Let no one, then, be a 
dogimatist for either church or state, for each has its proper mis¬ 
sion. The family, the church and the state should work in har¬ 
mony in this great cause, and some of the most difficult prob¬ 
lems of the age can be easily solved. 

2. In the past, education has been considered too much a 
crowding process. The more studies the student took, the bet¬ 
ter it was thought. This is a mistake, for education is a 
drawing-out process. In fact, it is translated from a Latin 
word, which means to draw out. The true object of education 
is the development of all man’s faculties and powers. The 
brightest display of infinite mind was manifested in the creation 
of the human mind. Man was placed in this world to be edu¬ 
cated not only for time, but also for eternity. True education 
is at the foundation of the solution of all great problems. 

3. Some writers seem to think that the Jesuits will greatly 
endanger the future of our public schools. It is certainly true 
that the Jesuits have been very naughty in the past, and have 
even been expelled from Catholic countries. But I do not 
think that they will ever seriously imperil our public schools. 
Times have changed and the Catholic Church would not now 
do what she once did. Whatever be the designs of the Jesuits, 
they will find our public schools too powerful for them. I hope, 
however, that their influence will go towards forcing our school 
authorities to give more attention to moral and religious instruc¬ 
tion. The Bible should not only be read in our public 
schools, but a textrbook embodying the grand moral and spirit¬ 
ual truths of the Bible should be taught in every school. Is not 
sacred history as important as profane ? There can be no rea¬ 
sonable excuse for excluding it from our public schools. 

Says one: “It would be sectarian to teach the Bible in the 
public schools.” This is on the supposition that the Bible is 
a sectarian book, which is not true. If the Bible is sectarian, 
our civilization is sectarian, for it is builded upon an open Bi¬ 
ble. The Continental Congress appointed a Thanksgiving Day, 
and from the days of Washington to the present time the Chris¬ 
tian character of our institutions has been recognized. The sec- 


THE PROBLEM OF EDUCATION. 


153 


ularist theory is against, the history of our country. The chap¬ 
lains in the army, and the oath administered in courts of just¬ 
ice, all clearly show the Christian character of American civili¬ 
zation. In fact, even a political convention can not well be 
called without a minister to open with prayer. The reading of 
the Bible in our schools is certainly in harmony with the char- 
acter of our institutions, and its exclusion is against* the funda¬ 
mental principles of our civilization. Even Professor Huxley, 
whom the secularist delights to honor, favors the proper use of 
the Bible in the schools; and lie further claims that where the 
intellectual side of the child’s nature is alone developed, it is 
just as likely to produce a crop of scoundrels as anything else. 


CHAPTER VII. 
Problems of the Home. 


INTRODUCTION. 

The word “home” has only four letters; but like the words 
“faith,” “hope” and “love,” it is one of the most expressive 
words in the English language. The word “home” touches 

9 

every chord of the human heart with its celestial fingers. The 
most tender and endearing relations are linked with the word 
“home.” Even when we are far away from home, the very 
thought of the enchanting word opens up in our nature the 
richest thought and feeling. 

« 

With the word “home” is inseparably connected the scenes 
of childhood. The father’s protection and the mother’s love 
throw about home a heavenly halo which is not forgotten by 
even one who has wandered far away from home. As soon as 
the prodigal son came to himself he thought of his home, and 
resolved to return to his father’s house. It is said that the 
greatest of Prussian generals wept like a child when he returned 
to his old homestead. When old associations vividly placed 
before his mind the representation of father and mother at 
home, the leader upon many bloody fields lifted up his voice 
and wept. He wanted an old man who had known him in 
childhood to call him bv the name by which he was called at 
the village school. 

The beautiful and tender associations that cluster about the 
word “home” are scarcely to be compared to^ anything else. 
Even wealth and honor compared with it are cold and heartless 
terms. When the old man thinks of home he feels voung 
again. When the honest man of toil is worn out he finds rest 
at home. The care-worn missionary finds rest at home, peace 
of mind, and refreshment of spirit that he can not find among 
strangers. 

The home is the true source of civilization ; and that nation 
which does not properly regard the sanctity of home, is pre- 

154 


PROBLEMS OK THE HOME. 


155 

pared for barbarism. 1 lie palmy days of Koine were when the 
highest estimate was placed upon the influence of home, and 
woman occupied her true position in society. Our civilization 
is safe so long as the homes of the land are reaching for the 
highest Christian culture. 

1 here is both earthly and heavenly music in the word 
“home. 1 here is sweet music in the memory of early home. 
I he songs of mother heard in early childhood are long remem- 
bored, h aitli and hope introduce us to the music of the celes¬ 
tial pity. It is sweet to think of-our heavenly home, sweet home. 

v %J j 

“Sweet home! 

The resort of love and joy, 

Where the purest affections 
Find employ; 

And where perfected humanity 
Will finally rest, 

In the glorious land 
Which God has blest.” 

SECTION I.-LESSONS OF THE HOME. 

Many men owe their success in life to the influence of a 
Christian mother. There is nothing more beautiful than a de¬ 
voted, religious mother at home. It is very important for 
children to acquire good moral habits in early life, and these 
can be best taught by the watchful training of a pious mother. 
Children are great imitators, and they imitate those whom they 
Jove most. Parental example, therefore, becomes of all things 
the 'most important in the bringing up of children. If the 
mother tells the child that she will give it the moon for a play¬ 
thing’, it believes her. If she shows it the face of a man and 
dog in the moon, it imagines it can see them; and in after life 
it is very difficult for the person to ever fully banish that idea. 
Parents should always tell their children the truth, and care¬ 
fully guard against making false impressions that may be last¬ 
ing. There is much truth in the poetic statement about the 
inclining tree towards the once bent twig. The mothers of the 
land can do much towards solving the greatest problems of the 
age. 



156 


MACROCOSM US. 


The love of a true mother for her child is indeed beautiful. 
It is always pleasant for a person when far away from the 
scenes of childhood to think of the love and care of mother. 
Others may forsake the wanderer, but mother, never. We are 
safe in stating that no other influence in childhood is so great 
as that of mother. Cuvier, Guizot and Cousin were associates 
in boyhood. It is said that Madame Cuvier was very pious, 
and she made a lasting impression upon the minds of the 
hoys. They all became great and good men. Cuvier was the 
greatest of scientists, Guizot a great historian, and Cousin one 
of the greatest of modern philosophers. The mother’s love 
for her child is a beautiful illustration of the love of Christ 
for us. 

Christ is the Head of the church, even as the husband is 
the head of the wife. As Christ loved the church and died for 
it, so ought husbands to love their wives even better than them¬ 
selves. The love of a wife is generally stronger than that of the 
husband, but the love of Christ for his bride is amazing, and 

it. should kindle a flame of celestial fire in the bosom of everv 

«/ 

disciple of Christ. Nothing makes home happier than the per¬ 
petual sunshine of a contented disposition on the part, of hus¬ 
band and wife. It makes a beautiful rainbow round about the 
family roof. The love of many husbands for their wives is like 
the love Alfidi had for his horse. He felt sad when the horse 
was sick, but this did not prevent his fretting when the horse 
would not go his way. It is said that red foxes, when mating, 
stare upon each other with eyes wide open, and then lie down 
side by side with eyes half closed, perfectly content. It is well 
for lovers to keep their eyes wide open; but when married they 
should keep their eyes partly closed in charity for each other’s 
failings, and grow together in love and contentment. 

The whipping-post has been established as a sure cure for 
wife-whipping in Xevada. We wish, also, that there was some 
wav of correcting the cruel words and unmanlv tyranny of 
some so-called Christian husbands towards their wives. We 
have frequently been made sad at the unfeeling conduct of men 



PROBLEMS OF THE HOME. 


157 


of high standing in the church towards their families. It would 
not do to say that they did not love their families, but their 
conduct was exceedingly strange. It was doubtless largely due 
to thoughtlessness. Tender and affectionate treatment on the 
part of the members of a family will make home a paradise 
more precious than the most elegant, mansion. In some coun¬ 
tries in the east the bridegroom and bride eat, a quince together 
to sweeten their breath. It would be well even in this country 
for many to eat something to sweeten their temper through life. 
We recommend to all the bread of life, and it will certainly 
render happy all who properly appropriate it. 

It is not proper to say that all tyranny is on the part of 
man. Sometimes a really good husband is under the control of 
a silly, selfish wife, and he dare not say that, his soul is his own. 
He listens to every whim ; and she destroys not only his happi¬ 
ness, but also his power of doing good. She may be naturally 
a very good woman, but have suffered herself to become so 
whimsical that she is really good for nothing. In fact, it would 
have been better for the world and her husband if she had 
never been born. The tyranny which the home permits fashion 
to impose upon it, is indeed fearful. The shoe-heels of fash¬ 
ionable ladies are pegs on which they hobble and totter like Chi¬ 
nese women. The trinkets and gewgaws frequently worn to 
church are verv unbecoming. Bangs may do very well for la- 
dies of high foreheads, but they give some a monkey-like 
appearance, which Mr. Darwin claimed to be characteristic of 
our remote ancestors. It is well that, bangs have gone out of 
fashion. The tyranny of society causes some homes to give 
intoxicating wines to voung men who have inherited tendencies 
to drink intoxicants. There is much harm frequently done at 
fashionable parties in this way. I knew of a case where the 
daughter of a wealthy church-member caused the preacher’s 
son to get drunk. Let us rise above the tyranny of society, and 
be free men and women. 

There can be no Scriptural home without piety and love 
of God. Such homes are the true protection of society, and the 


158 


MACROCOSMUS. 


liupo of the world. The great problems of the age can never 
be solved without a full recognition of the divine character of 
the family. Its laws are laid down in the Bible, and are de¬ 
signed for perpetuity. Xo nation which ignores them can truly 
advance in civilization. As the highest development of the 
family idea is the relationship of Christ to the church, it -s 
evident that the family can never solve its problems apart from 
Christianity. 

Our Saviour fully recognized the sanctity of the home. Be¬ 
fore his public ministry, Xazareth was his home, and after the 
beginning of his 'ministry Bethany was his temporary home. 
It was at this temporary home that he performed one of his 
most striking miracles. Although the Son of man frequently 
did not have a place to lay his head, when he was in Jerusalem, 
he found a loving home at Bethany. Christianity certainly 
presents the highest type of home life. A great philosopher 
sav9 that they have no home in the east. This is true of all 
countries destitute of the light of the gospel. 

Some of the best people in this world have been wanderers 
and fugitives. They have had no earthlv home. Even the man 
who wrote “Sweet Home” never nad a home. He would some¬ 
times be on a street in a cold, wintry night, without a place to 
lay his head, and hear the people in their quiet homes sing his 
song. The song should of itself have given him a support, but 
the great man was not appreciated until after his death. The 
Americans would give liberally after his death for a monu¬ 
ment; but when he was living there was no one to give John 
Howard Payne even an humble home. 

To the careworn Christian, the heavenly Home, Sweet 
Home, will furnish a permanent abiding-place. There will be 
no disease, no death, to disturb its happiness. It will be a 
home exactly suited to all who reach that heavenly country. 
The capital city will have gates of pearl, walls of jasper, streets 
of gold, and under it will flow the river of life, on the banks 
of which will stand the tree of life, and its leaves will be for 
the healing of all nations. The throne of God will be in the 
center, and 'man will be an heir to the universal possessions of 


PROBLEMS OF THE HOME. 


159 


his heavenly Father. The family idea there will reach abso¬ 
lute perfection. The mansions which Jesus is preparing are 
suited to all. They will be mansions of intellectual delight, 
and adapted to the highest intellectual development ; they will 
be mansions of spotless purity, and suited to the sinless con¬ 
dition of man ; they will be mansions of superlative bliss, for 
all in them will be perfectly happy. If some earthly possession 
were promised us, we would search diligently to know all about 
it. Let us try to know more about our eternal home. 

We can be fully happy only when living in anticipation of 
our eternal home. In the early age of Christianity, take a man 
who lived for this world alone, and one who specially lived for 
the world to come, and mark the contrast. Hero wore the 
crown of universal dominion, and had all the wealth this world 
possessed, yet. he was not happy. The roads in almost every 
country led to his capital, and the eves of all the people were 
directed to him, vet he could not find peace in the world. He 
was at the head of that great empire whose conquering eagles 
had spread their golden wings in almost every country of the 
then civilized world. Distant kings asked the privilege of hold¬ 
ing' their crowns as tributarv to his own ; vet he was miserable, 
and ended his wretched career in suicide. How different it was 
with Paul the apostle, who died a martyr at Pome. He was 
perfectly happy, and ready to die at any time. He knew that 
the Lord had prepared for him an eternal home in the heavens, 
and that he would receive a crown far superior in splendor to 
the glittering diadem that bedecked the brow of the Roman em¬ 
peror. When men live for eternity as well as time, as a great 
German has taught, then the great problems of life can be 
readily solved. 

SECTION II.-TIIE EDUCATIONAL POSSIBILITIES OF THE HOME. 

The Bible requires parents to educate their children. In 
Shakespeare there are no children mentioned, and I believe 
there is only one mother named, but in the Bible it. is entirely 
different. God’s book largely dwells upon the duties of the 
family. The Old Covenant was very specific on the educational 


160 


MACROCOSMUS. 


duties of parents. The New Testament also requires parents 
to teach their children. Professor Seeley claims that much 
harm has been done by parents entrusting to others that part 
of the child's education which they should perform themselves. 
There are some things which parents can teach children that can 
not be so well taught by others. L want to dwell here to con¬ 
siderable extent upon some subjects which parents should teacii 
their children; and the investigation it would require would be 
of immense benefit to the parents as well as to the children. 
Of course, it.is the duty of parents, as well as schoolteachers, 

t 

to train the child physically, intellectually and morally. This 
is necessary not only for the good of the child, but also for the 
good of society. These subjects we have discussed elsewhere, 
and can not dwell upon them at this time. I want now to call 
especial attention to subjects which are largely neglected. 


SELF-CONTROL. 

There can be no true manhood or womanhood without self- 
control. In fact, it forms one distinguishing characteristic be¬ 
tween man and the lower animals. The greatest men in history 
have been distinguished by the manly principle of self-control. 
Self-control greatlv benefits our health. I once knew a woman 
who had been an invalid for years, and, for some reason, her 
husband went to parts unknown. Not long after, I found her 
working at a hotel, a well woman. An excellent ladv, not long 
since, told me that responsibility had made a well woman of her. 

(1) We should control our thoughts. Jesus of Nazareth 
went beyond all other teachers and lawgivers in the emphasis 
he placed upon the control of thought. It is evident that men 
can not become great thinkers unless they acquire the habit of 
controlling their thoughts. It must be remembered that thought 
is something more than dav-dreaming, which is only the mind’? 
acting at random. Tf this were thinking, in the proper sense of 
the word, then the idiot would be a thinker. A failure to prop¬ 
erly control thought has been the ruin of many promising young 
persons. No thinking is really worthy of the name of thought 
if it is not under the control of the will. In learning how to 


Jt’KOBLKAIS OF THE HOME. 


161 


think we must learn how to control our thoughts. The lirst thing 
to be done is to place thought under control of the will. There 
has been much written about getting control of our animal pas¬ 
sions; and many prayers have been offered for help to overcome 
the evil tendencies of human nature. When the mind is com¬ 
pletely subservient to' the will, there will not be much difficulty 
in governing the passions. It is the imagination, unrestrained, 
that kindles the fire of passion. Force the imagination, with 
powerful will force, to dwell upon only the pure, and there will 
be no difficulty in governing the passions. 

Much emphasis must be placed upon a complete command 
of thought. In this we have the difference between the man 
intellectually weak and the one intellectually strong. The weak 
one lets his thoughts wander everywhere, but the strong one 
places them upon the great objects of his study. The difference 
between the savage man and the one civilized, is the fact that 
the civilized thinks and the savage does not think. When the 
savage can be induced to think, he soon reaches a state of civili¬ 
zation. 

When the power of concentration has once been acquired, 
the next thing is to arrange and systematize thought. Concen¬ 
tration and system are certain to bring success to the thinker. 
The first can be acquired by watching every tendency of the 
mind to wander, and immediately check it. Constant care for 
a few years will thoroughly discipline the mind. System must 
be studied, and then thought will he directed towards a certain 
object. Systematic work is the only kind of work that will cer¬ 
tainly bring success. In order to learn proper system, we should 
analyze some subject every day. Practice makes perfect in this 
kind of work as well as anv other. As a man thinketh, so is 
he. This being true, we should be careful to control our 
thoughts. Every thought affects some part of our nature. If 
I am hungry and think of a good apple, it makes my mouth 
water. Evil thoughts must affect our nature for evil. Jesus 
went far beyond all other teachers in making man responsible 
for the thought as well as for the deed. If a man always thinks 


162 


MACBOCOSMUS. 


right, he is certain always to speak right, and to do right. We 
must guard our thoughts, for our Saviour will judge us for 
them. It would be well for all social reformers to think more 
along this line. 

(2) We should learn to control even our moods. In good 
moods persons feel like performing duty; in bad moods they 
feel like not performing it. Moods in life are more numerous 
than the moods of English verbs, which every student knows are 
sufficiently numerous. Moods are made scapegoats to bear 
away many personal misgivings. Many incivilities and gross 
improprieties are excused on the ground of moods. I have vis¬ 
ited persons with whom it was a pleasure to associate one day, 
but a great trial to endure their company the next. How is it 
that a man can be a saint one dav and a devil the next ? It is 
explained on the ground of moods. Pope says, “Explain it as 
you will, woman is a contradiction still." If the poet had 
studied carefully the coarser sex, he would have found fullv 
as great a contradiction. Sometimes men are pleasant; at other 
times they are as savage as Hottentots. I remember a merchant 
whom you might find pleasant if you entered his store in the 
morning; if you entered also in the evening, you might find 
his feelings bristling like the quills of a hedgehog. This man 
was an officer in the church. 

Persons can learn to control their moods if they will. 

«/ 

know there are certain diseases which very much affect the sen- 

i/ 

sibilities, and are doubtless the cause of moodiness on the part 
of some. These persons are to be pitied, provided they have 
not. brought on the diseases bv flagrant violations of the laws 
of nature. I believe that bile had much to do with originating 
tlie doctrine of total hereditary depravity—that it makes men 
sometimes feel that they have fallen from grace—that it act- 
uallv makes men fall from grace. In all things we should be 
governed by principle, and not by feeling. We should do right, 
and let feeling take care of itself. I believe in a morality and 
religion of principle, not one of sentiment merely. 



PROBLEMS OF THE HOME. 


163 


THE SECRET OF SUCCESS. 

Parents should carefully teach their children how to make 
life a success. This subject is too much neglected, both in the 
family and the school. 

It is not in mortals to command success; 

But we’ll do more, Semphronius— 

We’ll deserve it. 

— Addison. 

if mortals can not command success, they can, at least, so 
train their children that they will deserve it. 

Success is one of the most expressive words in the English 
language. In comprehensiveness it has but few equals. Gen¬ 
eration after generation ponders its meaning; but, alas! how 
few are the individuals who fully understand it. Seven is a 
perfect number in the Bible. If not a perfect number, it is, at 
least, a favorite one in the science of language. This is espe¬ 
cially true with the English. Some of our most important 
words are spelled with seven letters. Liberty, freedom, bond¬ 
age, slavery, contain each seven letters. There are seven letters 
in the word “success,” and seven in its opposite—“failure.” 

(1) What is it to be successful in life? Some measure 
success by the amount of money acquired. I his is a false 
measure. I remember a family which was envied on account 
of its great wealth. The head of that family largely controlled 
a county with his money. He made slaves of many of C au- 
casian descent. Tn a few years he committed suicide. All of 
his hoys are dead, T belive; with the exception of one, they 
were killed. The girls made a mistake in marriage. Money 
was the ruin of that family instead of making it a success. 
Money is a good thing, properly controlled ; but let it once take 
the reins into its own hands, and in a short time it will drive 

its steed into the great abyss. 

There are those who identify success with worldly pleas¬ 
ures. They think that if they can have everything which the 
senses can enjoy, they have reached the summit of success. 
This was the doctrine of the Epicurean philosophy, which 



164 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


mocked at the preaching of Paul. Moses refused these tem¬ 
porary pleasures for a substantial and enduring reward; and 
the wisest of men, who had enjoyed them to his satisfaction, 
pronounced them vanity and vexation of spirit. 

There are still others, who think that earthlv fame is sue- 
cess. They are the devotees of the god of ambition. The career 
of such is soon run. Their lives generally end in misery. 
Alexander, Hannibal, Caesar and Napoleon are illustrations jf 
this truth. Solomon’s worldly fame was such that the Queen 
of Sheba lost her spirit in the contemplation of his glory. He 
pronounced this also vanity and vexation of spirit. 

Tn order to properly understand what success in life is, it 
is necessary to study carefully man’s true position in the uni¬ 
verse, and the adaptation of the world and all that is in it to 
his wants. While happiness is not a synonym of success, it is 
a very important condition. Pear of God and obedience to 
his commandments are. the true antecedents of success. 
Nothing will fully satisfy man’s longings except the necessary 
development of the physical, intellectual, moral and religious 
elements of his nature. 


What, shall I do to be forever known? 

Thy duty ever! 

This did full many who sleep unknown, 

Oh, never, never, never! 

Think'st thou perchance that they remain unknown, 
Whom thou knowes>t not? 

By angel trumps in heaven their praise is blown, 
Divine their lot! 

— Schiller. 


(2) How to be successful in life. Be careful in the selec¬ 
tion of an occupation. God designs all persons for success and 
none for failure. Man is ever the cause of failure; God, never. 
If we will do that for which we are adapted, then we will be 
successful. T believe that every man who does not bow T the 
knee to Venus, Bacchus, mammon or ambition can know that 
for which he is suited. Men fail because thev try to be what 
God never intended them to be. 


PROBLEMS OF TIIE HOME. 


165 


In every occupation competition is great, and success 
largely depends upon decision, prudence, activity and persist¬ 
ence. Carlyle truly says: 'The race of life has become in¬ 
tense; the runners are treading upon each other’s heels ; woe be 
to him who stops to tie his shoe-strings." There are very 
many valuable lessons that parents should be able to teach 
their children on this subject. Ponder well the following lines 
of Schiller: 

“What shall I do to gain eternal life? 

Discharge aright 

The simple dues with which each day is rife; 

Yea. with thy might. 

Ere perfect scheme of action thou devise, 

Will life be fled; 

While he who ever acts as conscience cries, 

Shall live, though dead.” 

POLITENESS. 

If parents want their children to succeed in life, they must 
' teach them politeness. Politeness is elegance of manners, and 
it has much more to do with success than many persons are 
disposed to think. It consists in being easy one’s self, and in 
making others comfortable. While the ceremonies of countries 
differ, politeness is everywhere the same. It can not be ac¬ 
quired by simply studying the works of etiquette; there must 
be genuine love of humanity on the part of persons who want 
to be truly polite. Some persons think they can become polite 
by always thinking of self. That can not be. Such persons 
usually become disgusting. Politeness does not consist in ex¬ 
alting self, but in loving others as self. Parents should study 
this subject carefully and not fail to teach their children their 
obligation to others. George Washington did not think it be¬ 
neath his dignity to be polite to a colored man ; but there are 
now young men and young women who will permit the negro 
to far surpass them in politeness. 

As love covers many sins before God, so politeness hide? 
many faults from the sight of men. The good manners of 
Charles James Fox saved him from personal reproach when 


166 


MACROCOSMUS. 


he had wasted all his property, and was, politically, the dead¬ 
est man in England. It is said that, during the days of sla¬ 
very, tw T o Abolition lecturers started out at the same time; the 
one a fiery young man, and the other a mild Quaker. The 
young man' was mistreated in every village he visited; the 
Quaker was always treated with politeness. The young lec¬ 
turer inquired of the Quaker the cause of this. The response 
was: “Thee says, ‘If you do not do so and so, you shall be pun¬ 
ished,’ and I sav, ‘If vou will do so and so, vou shall not be 
punished.’ ” They both said the same thing; the difference 
was in the manner. The one manifested a malicious spirit, 
the other, a kindly feeling, towards his auditors. That kindly 
feeling you will find in the addresses and writings of the apos¬ 
tles. 


Some nationalities are more polite than others. There is 
said to be a characteristic shvness about the Anglo-Saxon race 
unfavorable to good manners. Dr. Guthrie says: “Ask a man 
in Rome to show you the road, and he will politely do so ; but 
ask any person in Scotland such a question, and he will tell you ’ 
to follow your nose, and you will find it." lie blames the 
higher classes in Scotland for the rudeness of the common peo¬ 
ple. The people are apt to follow the example of their teach¬ 
ers. In France the higher class is polite to the lower, and the 
result is that all are polite. 

More attention should be paid to age in this country. There 
is an important work for parents along this line. The Chi¬ 
nese reverence the old, if they do make slaves of the young. 
In this country respect is shown young women, but not, gen- 
erallv, to the old that reverence which is due them. 

Politeness has great influence, and it generallv meets with 
a proper reward. Tt was largely by his charming manners that 
the Duke of Marlborough held together the members of the 
great alliance and accomplished his great design—the humilia¬ 
tion of Louis XI\. Many business men ov r e their success in 
life to courtesy. A Mr. Butler, of Providence, R. I., was so 
obliging as to reopen his store one night to accommodate a little 
girl who wanted a spool of thread. Tt is said that this gave 


PROBLEMS OF TIL F HOME. 


167 


him a start, and he died a millionaire, after having given forty 
thousand dollars to an insane asylum through the agency of 
Miss Dix, whom he was too polite to refuse. An Englishman. 

^ ^ ty a couple of old women, had bequeathed to 

him a large fortune. Professional men succeed much better bv 
being polite. I have sometimes been disgusted with the inten¬ 
tional oddities of ministers of the gospel. A man of God should 
not make himself boorish. Such preachers mav be good men, 
but it is sometimes difficult to find the kernel in such hard 
shells. 

BUSINESS AND RELIGION. 

All Christian parents should study the relation of business 
to religion, and teach the same to their children. The supposed 
conflict between religion and business has led to two very dan- 
gerous extremes. On the one hand, devout persons, deeply im¬ 
pressed with the reality of the future and the importance of 
preparation for it, have been influenced to abandon society, and 
seek a home in the solitude of the hermit’s retreat. It is sup¬ 
posed that the affections, in this way, can be drawn from the 
world, and love cultivated in the human heart. If this were 
true, the importance of the future state would demand a her¬ 
mit’s life at the hands of all. This, of course, would reduce 
the whole thing to an absurdity. Hot even the hermit himself 
would advocate such a life for all. We are satisfied that the 
Christianity of the Bible forbids the life of solitude, which 
prevents the performance of those duties which man owes to 
society. While in the world, we must do good to the world, 
and not live for self alone. In fact, it is difficult to study man 
apart from his relationship to society. 

The other tendency has also been productive of much evil. 
It is supposed that religion and business are in direct opposition 
to each other, and that a man can not attend properly to busi¬ 
ness and at the same time be religious. The consequence is, 
the business man gives but little attention to religion, and the 
religious man considers it inconsistent with his profession to 
give much attention to business. All this is wrong; business 


168 


MACROCOSMUS. 


and religion do not at all conflict. The planets in the heavens 
have a twofold motion—the one around the sun and the other 
upon their own axis. These motions are carried on simulta¬ 
neously, and in perfect harmony. The same can be said of 
man’s twofold activities ; the one can revolve around a heavenly 
center, and the other around an earthly center, and no> conflict 
between them. He can fulfill his religious duties, and, at the 
same time, attend to the business obligations of life. 

Paul insisted upon harmony between business and religion. 
“.Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord.’’ 
It is wrong for a man to be slothful in business; for a lazy man 
can not be a Christian. This is the doctrine of Paul. Man is 
intended by the Creator for infinite good, and this can only 
be found by perseverance and industry. While diligent in 
business, fervency of spirit must not be neglected. To express 
it in other words, we must serve God in business. 

in religion, we have both science and art. In the theory of 
religion there is science, and in its practice there is art. Its 
science blends with proper theory in all the avocations of life, 
and its art assists in performing all the duties of life. As is oil 
to machinery, so is true religion to the machinery of human 
activity. The prospects of something better encourages man 
in the most irksome toils; so the promises which the gospel 
vouchsafes to man encourage him amid the sorest trials and 
afflictions of life. What cares man for trial, persecution, and 
even death itself, when he knows that beyond this transitory 
world he will wear an immortal crown ? 

There are other subjects upon which T would like to dwell 
in this section, but space forbids. T am satisfied that the in¬ 
fluence of the home in solving the great problems of the age has 


not been sufficiently emphasized. The home is one of Jehovah’s 
earliest institutions, and it is vet most potent for either good 
or bad. Make the homes of the land just what the Bible 
teaches they should be, and they will become very powerful in¬ 
struments in advancing the highest civilization. The home, the 
church and the state are a divine trinity through which the 
greatest social problems of the age are to he solved. 


PROBLEMS OF THE HOME. 


169 


SECTION III.-THE HOME AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS. 

There is no other religion so old as that of the family. The 
effort o'f the Roman priesthood to supersede that of the father 
is certainly great presumption. For old bachelors to pry into 
the secrets of families, and try to direct others in duties they 
have renounced for themselves, is quite ridiculous. The Re¬ 
formers established family worship, and fully recognized the 
priesthood of the father. They took great interest in the study 
of patriarchal life, and did much towards the elevation of the 
family. From the standpoint of sociology alone, the Book of 
Genesis is of great interest. Instead of interfering with the 
religion of the family, there are certain duties which the church 
owes the family. (1) The church should teach the importance 
of family religion. If it would he more faithful in this re- 
sped, it would have fewer apostates. (2) The pulpit should 
wage an unceasing war against those institutions which destroy 
the true sanctity of the family. It should not to any extent 
tolerate those houses of iniquity in our cities, which are the 
principal cause of so many old bachelors. 

Infidel socialism is a great foe to> the home. It has tended 
to secularize marriage, and facilitate divorce. Christianity 
permits divorce only for adultery, but the secularist insists upon 
divorce at the option of the parties. The secularist has sub¬ 
stituted contract for moral law, and claims that the contract 
should he dissolved when the parties desire it. Fven Spencer 
and Mill take this position. Mr. J. S. Mill speaks of marriage 
as “the only actual bondage known to our law.’ Alexander 
Von Humboldt savs: “I regard marriage as a sin, and the prop 
agation of children as a crime. It is my conviction, also', that 
he is a fool, and still more a sinner, who takes upon himself 
the yoke ofi marriage.” These writers are constantly quoted by 
infidel socialists. While all secularists are not socialists., secu¬ 
larism has certainly been a great stipport to infidel socialism. 

These atheistic socialists deify either the individual or the 
state, and whichever position taken, there is an effort to crush 
out family life. Robert Owen denounced marriage as one of 


170 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


the greatest curses of modern society. The infidel part of Ger¬ 
man socialists are either in favor of abolishing the marriage 
tie, or leaving it entirely to the whims of the contracting par¬ 
ties. iSTo thoughtful person can, for a moment, question the 
fact that this class of socialists are the greatest enemies modern 
society has to encounter. They are greatly in the way of true 
progress on the part of the working classes. 

There can be no question that the solution of some of our 
most difficult social problems largely depends upon the family. 
The learned Dr. Hodge, in his ‘‘Outlines of Theology,” uses 
these weighty words: “As the social organization is founded on 
the distinction of the sexes, and as the well-being of the state 
and the purity and prosperity of the church rest on the sanctity 
of the family relation, it is of the last importance that the 
normal or divinely constituted relation of the sexes be preserved 
in its integrity.” In Volume II. of Kent’s Commentaries, we 
have the following: “The primary and most important of the 
domestic relations is that of husband and wife. It has its foun¬ 
dation in nature, and is the onlv lawful relation bv which Prov- 
idence has permitted the continuance of the human race. In 
every age it has had a propitious influence on the moral im¬ 
provement and happiness of mankind. It is one of the chief 
foundations of social order. We may justly place to the credit 
of the institution of marriage a great share of the blessings 
which flow from refinement of manners, the education of chil¬ 
dren, the sense of justice, and the cultivation of the liberal 
arts.” If these reckless infidels could be induced to study the 
language of the great law chancellor, there might be some pos¬ 
sibility of their enlightenment. What they need is the dissemi¬ 
nation among them of a little more intelligence. They, doubt¬ 


less, need also a good deal more conscience. 

Tufidel socialism is wrong in its positions that the individual 
is the unit of society, and that the state created the family. It 
is not the individual, but the family, that is the unit of society. 
There must be citizens in order to have a state, and there must 
be families in order to have citizens. Tt is evident, therefore, 
that the family antedated the state. The student of historv 


PROBLEMS OF THE HOME. 


171 


also knows that this is a fact. Considering the dependence of 
the state upon the family, there are certain duties to the family 
incumbent upon the state: (1) The state should see that all 
children have educational advantages. If parents refuse to 
educate their children, the state certainly has a right to inter¬ 
fere. (2) The state should abolish all those institutions of in¬ 


iquity that are so destructive to the well-being of the family. 

We will close this chapter in the following language of Dr. 
De Pressense: ‘‘It is only in man that this purification takes 
place, and that the feeling of love, blended in its first manifes¬ 
tations with instinct, more and more rises above it and assumes 
a character of nobleness and sympathy, which makes the union 
of soul predominate, though it does not cancel the attraction 
of beauty and its supreme charm. Modesty in the sexual re¬ 
lations, of which the animal knows nothing, makes us reticent 
of the outward signs of love. Human love begins with the en¬ 
chantment of the eves, but it is only worthy of itself when it 
has realized its ideal, the true harmony of souls. It is abso¬ 
lutely free in its'manifestations. lienee it can be false to itself, 

i/ 7 

and draggle itself in the mire of sensual indulgence, where it 
is identified with the animal instinct ; but when it fulfills its 
true mission, when it is manifested as the very flower of a 
nature in which the moral was meant to predominate, it tends 
to blend in one, not simply two organisms, but two individuals, 
who know how to combine respect with tenderness.” 


CHAPTER VIII. 

The Crime Problem. 

INTRODUCTION. 

The word “.crime” is derived from the Greek hrino, which 
means to judge. The Latin cerno 'means the same thing. 
Blackstone says: “A crime or misdemeanor is an act committed 
or omitted in violation of public law.” 

Dr. Lewis, the originator of the Woman’s Crusade, makes 
rather an ingenious distinction between vice and crime. His 
opposition to Prohibition causes him to take positions which 
are not in harmony with the science of law. He claims that an 
act, in order to constitute a crime, must be committed with evil 
intent, and without the consent of the victim. Without these 
elements, they may be vices; but, according to his reasoning, 
they can not be crimes. While crimes should be punished by 
law, he insists that vices should be treated onlv bv reason and 
persuasion. 

There can be no arbitrarv distinction between vice and 

«■ 

crime. That which was not looked upon even as a vice fifty 
years ago, may now be considered a crime, and it may he pro¬ 
hibited by law. As public opinion becomes better educated, 
the law must become more rigid against evil-doers. Dr. Lewis 
defines vice as harm done to self in a mistaken pursuit of hap¬ 
piness. Then, the young man who broke his nose on his return 
from a visit to his intended was guilty of vice. We prefer 
Worcester’s definition, that vice is a violation of the moral law. 
Webster says that vice is “a moral fault or failing, especially 
in moral conduct or habit.” Webster defines crime as “any 
violation of law, either human or divine.” Dr. Lewis sa.ys: “A 
crime is a harm done to another with malice prepense, and with¬ 
out the consent of the victim.” If a mule throws a man and 
breaks his arm, and a doctor is called in to set it; if lie makes 
a mistake and his patient is injured (whatever his intentions 
mav have been), he can be prosecuted for malpractice. If an 

' 172 


THE CRIME PROBLEM. 


1^70 

1 t o 

act is committed with the consent of the victim, then, according 
to Dr. Lewis, it is not a crime. Suppose a man, tired of life, 
asks you to shoot him, would it be a crime to do sod It cer¬ 
tainly would not be wise to act upon this principle. The vile 
seducer, who ruins his victim, is not, according to this doctrine, 
a criminal. According to this principle, we would have to blot 
from the list of crimes and the domain of law, prostitution, 
adultery, gambling. The seducer and gambler would be left to 
practice their base vices upon all whose consent they could ob¬ 
tain. It must be admitted that such is too much a fact, even in 
the light of the twentieth-century civilization. 

SECTION I.-THE CAUSES OF CRIME. 

1. Heredity we will consider as the first cause of crime. 
Plato, in his “Phaedrus,” represents man as standing in a 
winged chariot, driving a white and black steed. The white 
represents the moral elements in man’s nature, and the black 
represents the evil elements. Man thus stands between the 
sensual and spiritual worlds, and he may go in either direction. 
The laws of heredity are worthy of careful study, for they may 
lead to either life or death. Scientists have presented us the 
following divisions: Premartial heredity, prenatal, direct, re- 
versional, collateral, co-equal and initial. These are the- gen¬ 
eral divisions, but others might be found. The fact is that he¬ 
redity is poorly understood, even at the present time. It, is a 
wonderful force for either the advancement or the degradation 
of the race. Moses was right when he taught that the iniquity 
of the fathers is visited upon the children, even to the third and 
fourth generations. If heredity can be employed in the direc¬ 
tion of wrong, it can also be employed in the direction of right. 
If the iniquity of the fathers can be visited upon the children, 
their virtues can also be visited. 

Heibuhr, the historian, declares that aristocratic families 
which feel impelled to intermarry, frequently fall into demen¬ 
tia and imbecility. I have for years studied what are called 
freaks in nature, and as a rule T am convinced that violated 
law on the part of ancestors will account for much. I once saw 


174 


MACROCOSMUS. 


a young man who appeared always to be drunk. He was., of 
course, imbecile. By careful inquiry I learned that bis father 
and mother were both drunkards. If sin itself can not be 
transmitted, a tendency to sin certainly can. If disease can not 
be transmitted, a fearful tendency to it is certainly transmitted. 
I have heard Oliver Wendell Holmes lecture a,t the Harvard 
Medical College. This question was once, asked him: “Cannot 
most diseases be cured if the physician is called early enough ?” 
“Yes,” said he, “but early enough would sometimes be two or 
three hundred years before the person is born.” 

When the father of Hero was congratulated upon the birth 
of his son, he replied: “Nothing good can come of me and 
Agrippina.” The father was certainly right, for Nero only 
brought evil to the state. He was much like his mother, and 
was guilty of her death. Some historians claim that Nero was 
insane, and not responsible. I do not think this. If he had 
embraced Christianity, instead of opposing it, it would have 
lifted him to a higher plane. Christianity will make a bad 
man good, and this shows its superiority as a moral force to 
anything else in this world. Mr. Spurgeon was right in the 
last address he ever delivered, when he declared that faith in 
Christ is the only salvation there is for the nineteenth century. 
[Mrs. I ,owber recently sowed some flower seed in a box of earth, 
and placed it near a kitchen window. It is interesting to ob¬ 
serve how the little plants, as they come up, bend toward the 
light. If the nineteenth century, before its close, had fully bent 
towards the light of the Sun of righteousness, the millennium 
would have begun with the twentieth century. 


2. Environment has much to do with crime. If the chil¬ 
dren of criminals can be placed under moral influence, they 
may become useful men and women. If they are brought up 
by criminals, how can we expect them to be anything less than 
criminals? Early impressions are among the most lasting, and 
if children are brought up by thieves, they are very apt to be¬ 
come thieves. In fact, some children are forced into vicious 
habits. We read in the papers of very young criminals. It 
may he that the children are forced into criminality. I visited 


THE CRIME PROBLEM. 


175 


'd jail not long' since where two little boys were with the other 
criminals, there was good, enough left in some of the prisoners 
to see how improper was this, and they were trying to teach 
the little boys. 

o. Idleness is a fearful cause of crime. God intends all 


men to be active, and idleness is a direct violation of the Crea¬ 
tor s command. If man is not employed in the service of God, 
he will be employed in the service of the devil. What a great 
mistake parents make when they do everything themselves, and 
leave nothing for their children to do. Idleness is one special 
cause why so many boys brought up in town or city become 
prodigals. If I had the space, I could describe a number that 
have been thus ruined. I now think of one who became a 
trunkard, and broke the heart of a faithful wife; of one who 
became a forger, and was sent to the penitentiary; of another 
who became a reckless gambler; and still of another who be¬ 
came a murderer, and was finally killed himself. Alexander 
was fearful lest his father would conquer the world, and not 
leave anything for him to do. It will be well for all parents 
to leave enough for their children to do. 

I. The liquor traffic is a fearful cause of crime. Some 
claim that alcohol stimulates man’s criminal nature, and others 
that it depresses the spiritual nature. The facts are that it 
really does both. That which destroys man’s 'moral equilibrium 
will necessarily lead to crime. Consider the following facts: 
(1) Drunkenness leiads to idleness, which we have already 
shown is productive of crime. (2) It tempts to lust and rob¬ 
bery by placing its victim, into the hands of that class of per¬ 
sons. (3) It makes its victims reckless, and ready for almost 


any misdemeanor. (4) It stimulates combativeness, and pre¬ 
pares its votaries for murder. (5) It is the life of the gam¬ 
bling-house and brothel, which are the hotbeds of crime. (6) 
Intoxicating liquors excite all the evil passions, and the liquor 
traffic thus becomes the ally of all kinds of crime. (7) Drunk¬ 
enness itself is a crime. The law of God and man condemns 
drunkenness. 


176 


MACROCOSM US. 


Sir Matthew Iiale, Chief Justice of England in 1670, says: 
‘‘I have found that if the murders and manslaughters, the bur¬ 
glaries and robberies, the riots and tumults, the adulteries, 
fornications, rapes, and other enormities that have happened in 
that time, were divided into live parts, four of them have been 
the issues and products of excessive drinking—of tavern or ale¬ 
house drinking.” Mr. Gladstone in our day used fully as strong 
language as did Chief-Justice Hale in the seventeenth century. 
We could quote equally as good authority in America. I have 
examined the best authorities on the subject, and I find that 
those who have a right to know make the use of alcoholic drinks 
the universal ally of crime. If it were not for alcoholic drinks, 
crimes would be diminished at least three-fourths. 

5. Pleasure-worship is a cause of crime. The Bible plainly 
teaches that sin has its pleasures, and sin is almost identical 
with crime. In fact, it is the violation of a higher law. There 
can be no question that pleasure-worshipers are the corrupters 
of the young. The theater generally requires the saloon for its 
support, and theatrical managers are nearly always in favor of 
the saloon. Hot long since the manager of a popular theater 
advocated open saloons on Sunday, and insisted that the city 
in which he lived was becoming too religious. 


Says one: “How can we know when amusements are 
wrong V ’ I answer: (1) An amusement is wrong when it 

has an unhealthy reaction. If it makes you nervous, so that 
you can not sleep, you had better leave it alone. A wild horse 
needs a. good rider; and those devoted to amusement are usually 
of an exuberant nature, which needs restraint. (2) An amuse¬ 
ment is wrong which leads to extravagance. The Cincinnati 
Commercial Tribune speaks of a charity ball in that city which 
cost each of the gentlemen present thirty-two dollars. Of 
course, young men getting only fifty and sixty dollars per month 
can not remain honest and attend such balls. (3) An amuse¬ 
ment is wrong which tends to become the chief object of life. 
Life is real, and God intends each individual for a noble pur¬ 
pose. There are amusements which may be of benefit. Alan 


THE CRIME PROBLEM. 


177 


certainly needs recreation. But if lie lives for no higher pur¬ 
pose than to bo amused, life with him will be a failure. 


Hr. Chauncey Depew declares that gambling is one of the 
greatest evils of the day. These are his words: “Public life is 
becoming honest year by year, and there seems to be only one 
vice that is increasing, and this contaminates the whole. This 
vice is growing with tremendous rapidity all over the earth, 
and especially among civilized nations. This vice is gambling.” 
Christian people should take a lesson from this, and quit card¬ 
playing, for it as certainly leads to gambling as moderate drink¬ 
ing leads to drunkenness. Too many professed Christians play 
euchre. It is rightly named progressive euchre, for it pro¬ 


gresses into the gambling-den. 

Mental dissipation is one of the greatest evils of our day. 
In the October Chauiauquan of 1891 there is an interesting 
article on the “Theory of Fiction-making.” It clearly shows 
that all the great writers of the past were romancers, and that 
the realists directly tend to sensualism. It also shows the sen¬ 
sual istic tendency of the young at the present time. There can 
be no question that much of the literature of the present day 
has a dangerous tendency. There ought to be in each city, as 
there was in the days of Paul, a great bonfire in which many 
of the books and papers of our day should be destroyed. While 
the printing-press is a great agent for good, it is also a. great 
agent for evil. All literature that corrupts the young should 
certainly be destroyed. The publishers of impure literature 
have the catalogues of nearly all the leading educational insti¬ 
tutions of the country, and in every way possible circulate their 
vile literature. Anthony Comstock, of New York, has done 
some grand work against these corrupters of the young. lie is 
truly a reformer, and I have enjoyed his articles in Our Day. 
I hope that all lovers of morality and purity will unite their 
efforts in banishing infamous literature from the rising gen¬ 


eration. 

6. Mammonism leads to crime. Jesus condemned the wor¬ 
ship of mammon in unsparing terms, and declared that no one 
who placed his trust in uncertain riches could enter the king- 


178 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


doan of God. This evidently will exclude many of our day. 
Paul was right in his position that the love of money is a root 
of all evil. Money is usually connected with almost every char* 
acter of crime. 

Mammon-worshipers frequently acquire their money by dis¬ 
honest means. In fact, the mammoth fortunes that are heaped 
up at the present, day are usually acquired by dishonest means. 
Chauncey Deperw says: “We now bet on everything. We put 
up money on stocks, upon food products, and upon everything 
that enters into our markets. We create artificial conditions, 
and bet upon them. We do the same with real estate, and we 
now bet in a different way upon our amusements. Our baseball 
system has become a lottery, and betting grows in these re¬ 
spects, and on races and at cards all over the world. The 
telegraph enables us to carry the betting-stands of the Jerome 
Park track to San Francisco, and there is a crowd around the 
blackboard in every city betting on the races. In clubs and 
private houses, more in the Old World than here, games of 
chance of every kind, with wagers upon results, are becoming 
as common as daily dinners, and you will hud a Monte Carlo 
going on privately at every one of the great watering-places of 
Europe. The condition of the public sentiment on this subject 
is illustrated by the conversation I had, while abroad this sum¬ 
mer, with a lady widely known for her charities and the support 
she gives both personally and financially to all religious and 
benevolent work. It was a large company, and the conversation 
had turned upon what were good investments, whereupon this 
lady said that the best thing she had were some shares in a 
gambling-house at Monte Carlo. She said these paid her 
25 per cent., and advised her friends to invest in them, as, 
even at the high rate the stock was then selling, it would 
pay 12 per cent net, and that “was better than the best 
Americans.” 

Mammon-worshipers are very apt to ruin their children. 
They, as a great writer savs, “lay up ruin for their heirs.” 
They save everything except their souls and their children. 
The worst criminals I have ever known were the children of 


THE CIII AXE PROBLEM. 


179 


the rich, 
catalogue 


They were guilty of almost every crime in the whole 
of crimes. The love of money is trulv a root of all 

u •/ 


evil. 

Mammonism is one great cause of pauperism, which also 
causes crime. The pauper loses all independence and self- 
respect, which are so essential to manliness. Homer thus 
speaks of the slave: 

“Whatever day 

Makes man a slave, takes half his worth away.” 


Pauperism takes not only half, hut all, man’s worth a,way. 
He is a burden and disgrace to the community, and is in great 

t - / V / CJ 

danger of becoming a criminal, if he is not in fact already one. 
The North American Review, April, 1S75, describes a crimi¬ 
nal pauper by the name of Margaret, who lived in Ulster 
County, X. Y., in 1790. The Review says: “She and her two 
sisters have begotten generations of paupers and criminals to 
such an extent that the total number now known, mainlv from 
Margaret—convicts, paupers, criminals, beggars and vagrants, 
including the living and dead—is 623. This mother of crimi¬ 
nals cost the countv hundreds of thousands of dollars.” 

Is 

7. Infidelity is another great cause of crime. Some per¬ 
sons will question the correctness of this position ; but I have 
made a special study of the history of infidelity, and I know 
I am correct. The most thoughtful men of the past have con¬ 
cluded that no state can prosper which is thoroughly infidel. 
Read Carlyle’s “French Revolution,” and you will learn much 
of the relationship of infidelity to crime. It seems that there 
was nothing diabolical that those infidel demons incarnate conhl 
not invent. The state was rapidly drifting to destruction, and, 
as a matter of self-preservation, had to repudiate those infidel 
principles which it had adopted. 

Mr. Greenleaf, the great writer on evidence^, claims that 
an atheist is not a competent witness in a court of justice, for 
there is nothing to bind his conscience. Civilization can not 
advance unless the conscience of the individual and the nation 
is properly developed. A pure religion is absolutely essential 
to this development. Veneration, spirituality and conscientious- 




180 


MACROCOSMUS. 


ness point to a supreme guide, and it is only the Ruler of this 
universe who can properly guide them. The Christianity of 
the Bible is exactly suited to this purpose, for it teaches our 
duty to both God and man. If all men could be brought up 
to the Christian standard, then society would reach perfection. 
We would have no crime if all men loved God with their whole 
hearts and their neighbors as themselves. 

SECTION II.-THE REMEDIES FOR CRIME. 

}. All criminals should be separated from society. . The 
Jewish law required lepers to be thus separated; and equally 
as strict a law should be applied to modern lepers.' There is 
a book on what is called the Jukes family, and it is claimed 
in this work that this family alone has cost the State of New 
York one million and a half of dollars. If the mother of these 
criminals had been separated from society, what a blessing it 
would have been to the people of New York. Many have 
heard of Maria, the mother of criminals, and all thoughtful 
persons must agree that such persons as Maria should be en¬ 
tirely separated from society. Says one, “Would not this in¬ 
terfere with personal rights ?” Law is certainly intended to 
prevent crime: and it should adopt the best and most humane 
methods in accomplishing this. Maria was a curse to her pos¬ 
terity as well as to society. No one has the right to be a crim- 
inal, and society should protect itself against the workers of 
iniquity. 

It is said that a military officer, on leaving his niece, kissed 
her. There was a sore on her lips, and she was soon affected 
by a leprous disease. It was caused by moral leprosy on the 
part of the uncle. What should be done with such lepers v 
Society will never be protected as it should until the laws of 
leprosy are enforced against all such criminals. The young 
lady mentioned is not the only one who has been killed by a 
kiss. 

2. There should bo reformatory prisons in every county. 
In fact, all prisons should be of this character; and all crim¬ 
inals, whose punishment is not more severe, should be kept. 


THE CHIME PROBLEM. 


181 


there until there is positive evidence of reformation on their 
part, l he prisoners should receive moral instruction daily, 
and it is evident that many of them could be entirely reformed, 
lhe way in which many prisons are kept only tends to harden 
the hearts of the prisoners, and to make them still greater crim¬ 
inals when they have served their time out. 

Ihere is no good reason why the state should appropriate 
all that the prisoner earns. It is the duty of the state to pro¬ 
tect the property as well as the lives of the people; and when 
it fails to do this, it should be held responsible. The state 
should only appropriate enough of the prisoner’s earnings to 
pay expense; the rest should go to the injured party until com¬ 
plete restoration is made, and then it should go to the prisoner’s 
family. The question of compensation I consider very im¬ 
portant ; for the people pay their taxes, and they have a right 
to complete protection. Besides, it would have a good indli¬ 
enee upon the prisoner. When I was president of an institu¬ 
tion, we had many complaints come in from a neighbor in 
reference to certain young men who had been disturbing his 
poultry. I learned of some chickens they had taken, and re¬ 
quired them to go to him and make complete restoration. The 
young men and our neighbor became the best of friends. 

3. There should be universal education. Our public school 
system is evidently the best in the world * and no one can 
oppose it and be a true friend to the American republic. If 
it were not for our school system, ignorance and immorality 
would very rapidly .overrun the country. America could not 
assimilate the masses of foreigners constantly pouring into the 
country if the children of the masses were not educated by the 
state. It is certainly the duty of the state to take the children 
awav from the drunken and vicious, and educate them for 

t/ 

life’s great mission. It is a disgrace to any nation to permit 
thousands of children to grow up in a gross and shameful deg¬ 
radation. It is better for the state to' educate children than 
to be compelled to execute men and women. The province of 
Wittenberg, Germany, has, for more than a century, required 
all parents to send their boys to school from eight to eigh- 


i 


182 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


teen years of age, and girls from eight to sixteen. It is said 
that there is seldom a murder in that, province. 

There ought to be some additions to our public schools to 
more perfectly accommodate the laboring classes. Some can 
only attend school two or three hours per day. There should 
be courses laid down to accommodate these. Night schools 
might be made very beneficial. There ought also to be a public 
library and lecture hall in every town and city. The young 
should be supplied with proper literature; for the mind needs 
its food as well as does the bodv. Moral lectures should be 
delivered one or two nights in every week. While the people 
should have an opportunity to pay the lecturer, there should be 
no admission fee. There is evidently much improvement to 
be made in the educational line, even in America. 

4. The saloon should be abolished. While our schools and 
churches are educating the people in virtue, the saloons are 
educating them in vice. There are about five saloons to each 
schoolhouse, and they verv largely counteract the good our edu- 
national institutions are accomplishing. 

As the saloon is the cause of at least three-fourths of the 
crimes committed, it certainlv should bo abolished. Victor 
Hugo, in his “History of the Crimes of Louis Napoleon,’’ 
clearly shows that this traitor to his country could not have 
induced the soldiery to fire upon the people, if he had not 
intoxicated them with brandy. The abolition of the liquor 
traffic would be one of the greatest preventives of crime. 

5. The state should prohibit every institution that leads to 
crime. I will only speak here of the crime of licentiousness. 
It is one of the most dangerous to the true interest of society. 
The Jewish law condemned the adulterer and adulteress to be 
stoned to death. Jesus considered the crime so great that it 
is the only one he mentions as severing the marriage bond. 
The strange woman promises her victims much, but leaves them 
with a most loathsome experience. Her house is the way to 
hell. Head the Book of Proverbs, and you will find a graph’’c 
description of her true character. Some writers so cover up 
the crime with the graces of belles-lettres, that their readers 


THE CRIME PROBLEM. 


' 183 


aie not able to sec it in all its repulsiveness. Lord Byron, in 
Don Juan, almost makes the crime attractive; and the same 
thing can be said of many recent writers. There is now a 
dangerous tendency to realism in fiction; and many of the 
heroes are lovers of other men’s wives, and many of the hero¬ 
ines are lovers of other women’s husbands* The press is, in 
many respects, a fearful ally of crime. 

It is disgraceful to a Christian civilization for brothels to 
be licensed or even tolerated. I have heard respectable per¬ 
sons argue that it is a necessity. The arguments used in favor 
o± the brothel can be used in favor of gambling-dens, or other 
institutions ot iniquity. As a matter of fact, all persons who 
violate the laws of chastity should be placed in a reformatorv 
prison until there is evidence of complete reformation on their 
part. The brothel is a nuisance, a crime against society, and 
it should be strictly prohibited. It tempts the young to crime; 
it vitiates human stock; and the state, which is designed for 
the protection of society, should entirely suppress it No adul¬ 
terer or adulteress should run loose in society. They are far 
more dangerous than catamounts or mad dogs. 

6. Criminals should be promptly punished. In modern as 
well as in ancient times some very trivial offenses have been 
punished by death. It is not surprising that the moral con¬ 
sciousness of the people has revolted against this* Excessive 
punishment tends to reaction, which leads to laxity. The cer¬ 
tainty of punishment is much more potential against crime 
than the severity of punishment* 

If criminals are not punished, mob law is the result. This 
shows that man’s moral nature demands a just punishment for 
crime. I do not mean that mobs are just, but they result from 
a perversion of justice. The relatives and friends of crim¬ 
inals, as a rule, do everything they can to let them loose upon 
society. Even the church has at times protected them. Yat- 
tel, m his ‘‘Law of Nations,” says: “History offers us a thou¬ 
sand examples of bishops who remained unpunished, or were 
but slightly chastised, for crimes for which nobles of the high- 
est rank forfeited their lives. John de Braganze justly in- 


184 


MACROCOSMUS. 


dieted the penalty of death on those noblemen who had con¬ 
spired his destruction; but he did not dare to put to death the 
Archbishop of Braga, the author of the detestable plot.” Yat- 
tel certainly shows that the Church of lvome did some very 
naughty things during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, 
and that the priesthood was protected in these crimes by the 
authority of the Roman See. It is not surprising that the 
people revolted against the authority of the Church of Rome. 

While all criminals should certainly be separated from soci¬ 
ety, I do not believe it is right to put men to death upon cir¬ 
cumstantial evidence alone. It is evident, upon the best author¬ 
ity, that many innocent persons have been executed. This, 
doubtless, was the main reason why General Lafayette, Victor 
Hugo, and many other eminent reformers, have been opposed 
to capital punishment. 

The word “capital” is derived from the Latin caput, the 
head; and is so named because capital punishment was origi¬ 
nally inflicted by decapitation. Such punishment should only 
bo inflicted upon the worst of criminals. In the confession of 
John A. Murrel, the notorious robber and murderer, we find 
an account of the murder of a poor wood-chopper. Murrel 
asked the poor man to give up his money; and on being in¬ 
formed that he had none and had a wife and eight children 
to support, told the wood-chopper that he had only five minutes 
in which to live. The poor man fell on his knees, and prayed 
even for his murderer; but Murrel was true to his word, and 
shot him after telling him that so poor a wretch should not 
live. Can any one question the right of the state to execute 
such an outlaw? He had filled his cup of iniquity, and was 
not worthy to live. I once thought that it might be well to 
abolish capital punishment; but upon more careful investiga¬ 
tion I am satisfied that [Mature and Revelation require it in 
certain cases. Read the following: “Whoso sheddeth man's 
blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God 
made he man” (Gen. ix. 6). 

The great object of civil government is the maintenance 
of justice among men. Its office is to make and execute right- 


THE CHIME PROBLEM. 


185 


eons laws. God never intended man to live alone, but con¬ 
stituted him for society. Civil society is, therefore, an insti- 
tution of God, and of divine origin. As society is of.divine 
origin, government, which is the outgrowth of society, is also 
of divine origin. “The powers that be,” that is, the legiti¬ 
mate powers of government, “are ordained of God” (Rom. 
xiii. 1). The demands of law and justice must not be disre¬ 
garded by any government, or the result will be anarchy. Bru¬ 
tus understood this when he executed his own son for violating 
the laws of Koine. The transgressor must be punished, or law¬ 
lessness will prevail and society suffer. 

Murder is the blackest and most heinous of crimes. “Thou 
shalt not kill,” is the language of the Sixth Commandment. 
The meaning is, thou shalt do no murder. Blood may be shed 
in the following cases, and the person be innocent: (1) In a 
case of accident where there is no intention to shed blood; (2) 
in a clear case of self-defense; (3) in a just and lawful war 
where defense is necessary against an unjust invasion; (4) in 
the execution of justice, where the officer has lawful power "o 
put capital offenders to death. The officer is simply doing his 
duty. The reason why murder is such a terrible crime, is the 
fact that, man was made in the image of God. The murderer 
not only sheds man’s blood, but also stabs God, in whose image 
man was made. The murderer has shed man’s blood, and by 
man shall his blood be shod. In Bent. xix. 21 we have this 
language: “Thine eye shall not pity, but life shall go for life.” 
We find in Hum. xxxv. 31-34 language still more definite: 
“Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of the mur¬ 
derer, who is guilty of death; but he shall be surely put to 
death:” Blood pollutes the land, and the inspired writer states: 
“The land can not be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, 
but by the blood of him that shed it.” We read of shocking 
murders almost every day in our papers; and our juries are 
less severe on them than they are on petty thieves. We are 
now having much mob law, and this is the cause of it. Bven 
murderers, when they confess their crimes, consent to the jus¬ 
tice of capital punishment. A few years ago I went, on the 


186 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


gallows with a murderer. He told me that lie ought to die 
for his crime. Capital punishment is in harmony with Matt, 
v. 39, which forbids private revenge, but not public punish¬ 
ment for crime. We have no right to take our causes into our 
own hands, for vengeance belongs to God (Ileb. x. 30). Civil 
government is God’s agent in executing vengeance against 
those that shed man's blood. 

7. The application of Christian principles to society will 
do more than anything else to stop crime. This is fully illus¬ 
trated m the triumphs of Christianity over the Roman Empire. 
Paul gives a proper description of the condition of heathen 
society. It seems that even the Roman people had been set on 
lire of hell, and sought only sensual gratification. Mr. Leekv 
speaks of the pages of Seutonius as remaining “an eternal wit¬ 
ness of the abysses of depravity, the hideous and intolerable 
cruelty, the hitherto unimagined extravagances of nameless 
lust, that were then manifested on the Palatine/' Re-nan uses 
language almost as strong. Matthew Arnold truly speaks in 
the following lines: 

“On that hard pagan world, disgust 
And secret loathing fell; 

Deep weariness, and sated lust, 

Made human life a hell!” 

Christianity triumphed over all these evils and regenerated 
society. Why is this ? We will let Mr. Lecky answer, for he 
is not supposed to be too favorable, at least to historical Chris¬ 
tianity. These are his words: “It united with its distinctive 
teaching a pure and noble system of ethics, and proved itself 
capable of realizing in its action.” 

Christianity teaches that God is the Father of all races; 
and this doctrine has done much to advance the cause of civili¬ 
zation. It should be made the fundamental principle of all in¬ 
ternational law. The doctrine of the Fatherhood of God binds 
the conscience of man, and it makes him feel responsible for 
his acts. The counterpart of the above is the doctrine that all 
men are brothers. In this Christianity rose far above the eth- 


THE CRIME PROBLEM. 


187 


nic religions of the world. No man who accepts with his 
whole heart the principles of Christianity can be guilty of any 
crime. If Christianity was universally triumphant, crime 
would be known no more. All persons interested in the eleva¬ 
tion of society must, then, be interested in the spread of Chris¬ 
tianity. 


If even one city in our country could be induced to carry 
out fully the principles of Christianity, what a wonderful light 
indeed it would be in this dark world. There would be no 
drunkenness; for no drunkard can enter into the kingdom of 
God. There would be no murder; for a murderer can net 
enter God’s kingdom. There would be no mammonis'm; for 
the man who trusts in uncertain riches can no more enter into 
God’s kingdom than a camel can go through the eye of a needle. 
There would be no stealing, for the Bible teaches the one who 
has been a thief to steal no more. There would be no brothels; 
for fornication and adultery are severely condemned in God’s 
word. In fact, all vices and crimes would be abolished, and 


society would soon reach perfection 


CHAPTER IX. 


The Problems of the Church. 

It is certainly a fact that the church does not reach the 
masses as it should. The lower classes in our large cities, as 
a rule, have no sympathy with the church. They look upon 
it as a kind of clubhouse for the rich man, and do not consider 
themselves even privileged to attend. This is not as it 
was in the first century, for Christianity had a special mes¬ 
sage for the poor. Christ came to preach the gospel to the 
poor, and the apostles fully carried out his commission in that 
respect. 

The church must bring itself again into sympathy with the 
people. In comparing the great cities of Christendom, it is 
a sad fact for our civilization that the greatest centers have 
very inadequate church accommodations for the people. Ber¬ 
lin, the Athens of modern times, has but about one hundred 
places of worship for more than a million people. These also 
include Jewish svnagogues. When we consider the inactivitv of 
tho German church, it is not surprising that there is so much 
infidel socialism in Germanv. London has more than five mil- 
lions of inhabitants, and only about sixteen hundred churches 
to accommodate this vast multitude. If things continue this 
wav, there will in another eenturv he manv more than a sub- 
merged tenth. 

It must be admitted that even in this country there are 

#/ 

very scant church accommodations in the great centers of influ- 
ence. It is claimed that even the churches we have can not 
he filled. It is certainly not because there are not people with 
which to fill them. It grows out of the hostility of the masses 
towards the church. The church is partly to blame for this, 
and much of it also grows out of social environment. What¬ 
ever the cause may be, it must be remedied, or our civilization 

is in danger. 

188 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CHURCH. 


189 


The church can not fulfill its mission unless it reaches the 
poor. There is a tendency in this country to move the churches 
from the centers of the cities, where the poor live, to the subur¬ 
ban homes of the rich. This leaves the poor without church 
privileges. Some think the remedy for this is to build cheap 
chapels for the poor. This is not in harmony with the princi¬ 
ples of Christianity, which make no distinction between rich 
and poor. All are one in Christ, and such distinctions only 
tend to. alienate the people more and more from the church. 
Let suitable and convenient houses of worship be built for 
all classes to worship together. When a man becomes a Mo¬ 
hammedan, no difference how poor he is, all other Mohamme^ 
dans receive him as a brother, and how much more so> should 
this be with the followers of Christ ! 

There is a great responsibility resting upon the American 
church. Foreigners and their children constitute more than 
one-third of our inhabitants. As these foreigners usually go 
to cities, our cities soon come largely under foreign control. 
Eighty per cent, of the population of New York City is either 
foreign-born, or children of foreign-born parents. In Chicago 
the per cent, is even larger. What, then, can the American 
church do for these foreigners? It is certainly a fact that 
many of these foreigners have a special antagonism towards 
Christianity. It may be a Herculean task, but these people 
must be converted. Our forefathers were once savages, and 
Christianity subdued their ferocious nature and gave us modern 
civilization. It may be well for the state, in certain cases, 
to restrict emigration; but the mission of the church is to 
convert all. Christianitv makes all men brothers, no differ- 
ence what mav be the race or nationalitv. 

t/ 

“Turn, turn, my wheel! The human race, 

Of every tongue, of every place, 

Caucasian, Coptic or Malay, 

All that inhabit this great earth, 

Whatever be their rank or worth, 

Are kindred and allied by birth, 

And made of the same clay.” 


190 


MACEOCOSMUS. 


SECTION I.-THE CHUKCH AND THE INDIVIDUAL. 

In a past, age, individualism was carried too far; and the 
relation of the individual to society was poorly understood. 
In fact, the greatest lawyers and statesmen were delighted to 
speak of the social compact t and the sacrifices the individual 
had to make for society. There never was a greater fiction than 
this social compact. A man is born in society, and his duties 
to society are as natural as his duties to himself. In fact, 
man is a social being, and can only accomplish his mission 
in connection with society. Those who talk about a conflict 
between individualism and socialism have certainly given but 
little attention to the problem. The great social conflicts of the 
present age can never be settled except by a pro]>er recognition 
of the individual and his obligations to soeietv. While the 
pendulum once swang too far in the direction of individualism, 
there is now great danger of its swinging too far in the direc¬ 
tion of socialism. I believe in a true socialism, as I do in 
a true individualism ; but infidel socialism only brings ruin to 
soeietv. As extreme individualism led to infidelity, so extreme 
socialism leads in the same direction. We should be careful 
to avoid extremes. 

Society is made up of individuals; so it can only be regen¬ 
erated by the regeneration of the individual. That is exactly 
the method of Christianity in uplifting humanity. While It 
has a golden chain extending from heaven to earth, and golden 
cords extending from this chain to all the nations, it has, also, 
golden threads extending to every human being. Christ com¬ 
missioned the apostles to preach the gospel to every human 
being. The nations can only be converted to Christ as the indi¬ 
viduals of these nations are converted. The church, then, can 
never bo divorced from true individualism. Its appeals must 
always be directly to the individual. 

v 1/ 

This might lie suggestive to many social reformers; for 
they try to regenerate society without regenerating the indi- 
vidual. I believe in the state’s doing all it can to counteract 
pauperism, and to promote a more just distribution of wealth ; 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CHURCH. 


191 


but state-help can never supersede the necessity of self-help. 
Paul's position that the individual should not eat unless he 
would work, is correct. Idleness is a crime against society; 
and those who will not embrace the opportunities offered them 
to provide for their own households, are worse than infidels. 
It is perfectly useless to talk about elevating society without 
elevating the individual. If all are properly taught how to 
make a success of life, the inequalities of society will rapidly 
disappear. I do not mean that all will succeed exactly alike; 
but each in his own wav can make life a success. I was a 
teacher for several years; and while I recognize the fact that 
some students can succeed better than others, T have never 
known any to fail who would properly applv themselves. In 
all our efforts to advance the interest of society, let us never 
lose sight of individual activity. 

If all Christians will do their duty, the church can do 
much toward solving the great problems of the age. One great 
difhcultv in Christian work is the fact that the individual gets 

•s o 

lost in the multitude. How frequently do we hear church-mem¬ 
bers of ability say that they should do so and so. It is only 
the most active members that say we must attend to such work. 
It is certainly a fact that the church at the present time can 
not properly command its resources. A large portion of the 
wealth of the world belongs to professed Christians. Suppose 
lhev possessed the spirit and liberality of the early Christians, 
how long do you think it would take to convert the world ? If 
the church in the twentieth century had the spirit and liberality 
of the church in the first century, in less than twenty-five 
years the world would be converted to Christ, and the great 
problems of the age would be largely solved. 

SECTION II.-THE CHURCH AND THE FAMILY. 

God does no! intend the church to abolish either the familv 
or the state. These are all intended to promote the progress 
of humanity, and should work in perfect harmony. The church 
fully recognizes the divine mission of the family, and the Sun¬ 
day-school is designed, not to supersede family instruction, but 


102 


MACROCOSMUS. 


to supplement it. One special mission of the church 
is to carefully guard the sacredness of the family rela¬ 
tionship. All institutions, therefore, which tend to destroy 
the divine character of the family are deadlv foes to the 

v! u 

church. The church and the family must either stand or 
fall together. 

It is certainly a sad fact to contemplate, when we find, ac¬ 
cording to statistics, that divorces in some of the States and 
Territories have run so high as 12 and 14 per cent, of the mar¬ 
riages. In many cases, there was separation without any appli- 
cation for a divorce. While more strict and uniform divorce 
laws would do good, even this would not reach the root of the 
trouble. Careful investigation in several towns and cities has 
shown the fact that many separate without even applying for 
a divorce, and form illicit unions as substitutes for marriage. 
I see no remedy for this except to lift the people to a higher 
moral plane, and to hurl God’s eternal truth at the consciences 
of the people as Paul did when preaching before Felix and 
Drusilla. 

Christian people can do much towards securing good laws 
for the protection of the family. While I am fully aware that 
laws can not be enforced until public sentiment is educated, 
the objector constantly overlooks the fact that law itself is a 
great educator. It must be admitted by all persons, who have 
given attention to the subject, that the property of a woman 
is now much better protected than her chastity. There is 
really no law against insulting a lady, and this leaves the peo¬ 
ple a law unto themselves. That is evidently one great reason 
why the shotgun and revolver are so frequently employed. A 
gentleman told me a few months ago that he saw an excellent 
lady insulted on a train some time ago. Tt was not long aftei 
this until that man was killed for insulting another lady. T 
attended the trial of her husband, and if the jury had decided 
according to the law, he would have been convicted of man¬ 
slaughter. The jury was out. three minutes, and brought in a 
verdict of not guilty. The judge told me that they never 
could convict a man under such circumstances; that the jurv 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CHURCH. 


193 


would pay no attention to the law. We certainly need more 
strict laws for the protection of the family. 

L>r. Mulford truly says: “Sociology is the coming science, 
and the family holds the key to it.” The same author also 
wrote: “The family is the most important question that has 
come before the American people since the war.” Professor 
Adams, of Johns Hopkins University, uses this expressive lan¬ 
guage: “The family, oldest of institutions, perpetually repro¬ 
duces the ethical history of man, and continually reconstructs 
the constitution of society. All students of sociology should 
grasp this radical truth, and should also remember that the 
school and college, town and city, state and nation, are, after 
all, but modified types of family institutions, and that a study 
of the individual elements of social and political life is a true 
method of advancing sociology, and politics in general.” While 
we greatly rejoice at the success the church has made in its 
Sunday-school work, we are sorry that there has not been a 
corresponding advance in the religious work of the family. 
We have no such works on the family as Trumbull on the 
Sunday-school, and Mulford on the nation. It is very import¬ 
ant that this department of Christian work speedily be brought 
to a. much higher standard of perfection. 

The church should unite its forces in abolishing the 
social vice, for it is a deadly foe to> the family. It, is 
also one of the most outbreaking and defiant forms of 
evil. The church can do much towards abolishing this 
evil in the following ways: (1) Christians, if they will 
make a proper effort, can better the condition of the laboring 
classes. The low wages, which many women receive in our 
cities, are a constant temptation to them to sell their chastity 
to obtain the necessaries of life. The poor are also frequently 
compelled to live in a kind of promiscuity that makes virtue 
almost, impossible. The very air around them seems to throb 
with foul speech; and we can not otherwise than expect them 
to be influenced by their environment. The church can not 
afford to neglect the cries of these poor women. (2) Christians 
should hold men responsible for their conduct the same as they 


194 


MACROCOSMUS. 


do women. It is very cowardly in society to banish the weaker 
sex for the sin it appears almost to commend in the stronger. 
A moral leper, especially if he be rich, can rnin a number of 
women, and then be received into society upon the same terms 
as the purest of men. In fact, he has no difficulty in marrying 
some pure woman. Christians can not afford to sanction such 
things, and they should make the standard for man precisely 
the same as they do for woman. (3) The church has an im¬ 
portant mission in elevating the tone of social purity. I very 
much fear that this subject is greatlv neglected bv the instruc- 
tors of the young. Unless proper attention is given to this sub¬ 
ject, our public schools may become sources of evil. All classes 
are there gathered together, and there is great danger that the 
evil-minded will corrupt the innocent. Christians can call the 
attention of the teachers to this subject, and so organize the 
students that great good can be accomplished. This is an im¬ 
portant field for Christian workers. 

The church should wage an unceasing war against the liq¬ 
uor traffic, for it brings more sorrow to the familv than anv 
other vice. In fact, it is the foundation of nearly all other 
vices and crimes. The people want protection from this ruin¬ 
ous traffic. A young lawyer not long since told me that lie 
was frequently invited to drink by older lawyers and by lead¬ 
ing politicians. This is certainly a deplorable state of society. 
A lawyer in middle life sent for me some time ago and con- 
fessed that rum had the better of him. It was sad to hear 
bis wails, and see the weeping wife and daughter. Unless 
the church is willing to make a covenant with death and hell, 
her voice ought to be unanimous against the liquor fiend. Un¬ 
less we are up and doing as Christians, what will another quar¬ 
ter of a century bring forth ? I am no pessimist; but I do 
tremble for my country if the liquor traffic is permitted to con- 
iinue twenty-five years longer unchecked. The license business 
only tends to make the traffic respectable. It is said that pros¬ 
titution has been so long licensed in some German cities that 
it has become so respectable that candidates for the harlot’s life 
have to present certificates that they have been confirmed in the 


/ 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CHURCH. - 195 

Established Church. 1 have lived in cities where professed 
Christians would walk out of saloons, wiping their mouths and 
looking as innocent as if they had been drinking soda water. 
The sooner Christians recognize the situation and gx> to work, 
tiie better it will he for their consciences and for their country. 
Let us all do wliat we can for suffering humanitv. 

O €/ 

“I must do something for the weary and the sad, 

I must give forth the love that makes my heart so glad; 

For God so fills my spirit with a joy that passeth show, 

I fain would do his bidding in the only way I know. 

So to suffering and to sorrow, I shall always give my heart, 

And pray to God that every day I may some good impart, 

Some little act of kindness, some little word of cheer, 

To make some drooping heart rejoice, or stay some falling tear. 
And when I’ve crossed the river, and passed the waters o’er, 

And feel that some will miss me upon the other shore, 

My grateful spirit ever shall bless the Lord divine. 

Who crowns the humblest efforts of a human love like mine.” 

SECTION III.-THE CHURCH AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS. 

The study of Acts and the Epistles from the standpoint of 
sociology would be both profitable and interesting. In fact, 
1 would like to see a good socialistic commentary on this part 
of the New Testament. The comparative study of the terms 
ecclesia and hoinonia are of much sociological interest. There 
can be no question that the early Christian church furnished 
the world with the highest type of society. According to the 
science of sociology, the best elements of society are: (1) A 
common cause in which all are interested; (2) a profound con¬ 
viction of the truth, developing the best faculties of man; (3) 
such an enthusiastic love that it conquers all selfish elements. 
These things were all fulfilled in the early history of the Jeru¬ 
salem church. We may add to these that the early Christians 
had common sufferings and a common hope. 

The ancient Christians did not practice communism in the 
sense in which it is advocated by modern infidel socialists. Dis¬ 
tribution was only made to those in need and those that would 
not work could not eat. There was no abolition of private 


196 MACROCpSMUS. 

property, for Peter said to Ananias, “While it remained, it 
was your own.” Ananias was condemned for trying to 
deceive the Holy Spirit in keeping back part of his 
property when he claimed to have given all. The apostle 
fully recognized the right of Ananias to it before he gave 
it away. 

The liberality of the Jerusalem church is a model fon all 
ages. In fact, Antioch and other churches showed a similar 
liberality. The early Christians would not lay up treasures 
on earth while their brethren were suffering for food. Noth¬ 
ing but a covetous and selfish exegesis can explain away the 
plain teaching of the New Testament on the subject. There 
is not a hint in the Acts of the Apostles that the liberality of 
the Jerusalem church was intended to be transitory. A distin¬ 
guished American statesman has said that so long as it is pos¬ 
sible for one man to hold a hundred million dollars of property, 
and to wield the vast power such wealth puts into his hands, 
so long there will be discontent among the laboring classes, 
and this discontent will result in communism and anarchy. In 
the seventeenth century Thomas Fuller declared that if any sup¬ 
pose that society can be peaceful while one-half is prospered 
and the other half pinched, let him try whether he can laugh 
with one side of his face while he weeps with the other. This 
is a question the church will have to face, and its postpone¬ 
ment will do no good. It is certain that it is the greed of the 
church, and not its creed, that is making so many infidels at 
the present time. The Pope of Pome lives in a palace with 
five or six hundred attendants, and receives annually one and 
a half millions of dollars. What will sensible people think 
of his claim to be the successor of Simon Peter, who scarcely 
had a place to lav his head ? There is hoarded up in Protestant 
hands about ten billions of dollars, notwithstanding the fact 
that our Saviour warned his disciples against laying up treas¬ 
ures in earth. The fate of Hives will certainly be the fate of 
many professed Christians; for Jesus taught the impossibility 
of serving both God and mammon. There is an impassable 
gulf between God and mammon. There is an impassable gulf 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CHURCH. 


197 


between Dives and Lazarus in this world as well as in the world 
to come, and it can only be bridged by the conversion of 
Dives. This conversion must take place in this world, for 
Christ certainly, taught that there is no hope in the world to 
come. 

The church can do much towards solving the labor problem. 
I do not mean that this is to be clone bv interfering' with the 
proper functions of the state. The work of the church 
is moral and religious, and it should never lose sight of 
this. While the church has its mission even in the polit¬ 
ical world, it is of a moral and religious character. 
McCosh has truly said that Gen. iii. 15 contains an epit¬ 
ome of the history of the world. The world is a scene of 
good and evil, and there is necessarily a conflict between the 
two. Science harmonizes with the Bible when it calls life a 
struggle for existence. 

It is the business of the church to condemn the wrong wher¬ 
ever found. Human nature is much the same everywhere, and 
if laboring men could exchange places with capitalists, they 
would act very much as capitalists now act. This is shown by 
the way in which they treat one another. If a man does not 
happen to belong to their trust, they will not let him work; 
and in this they violate the principles of the American Con¬ 
stitution. It is an interference with personal liberty that 
should not at all be tolerated. I know a young man well who 
was thrown out of work because he could not conscientiously 
belong to a labor union. The union men would not*work with 
him. This was certainly an unlawful interference with per¬ 
sonal rights. The labor unions have doubtless done good in 
protecting the rights of the laboring men, and in this we rejoice, 
and will continue tO' rejoice. We can not, however, sanction 
wrong on the part of any. The church should make a special 
effort to convert the laboring men, and protect them from the 
influence of infidel socialists. By a united effort on the part of 
all Christians, the church can do for the downtrodden in the 
twentieth century what it did for the same class in the first 
century. 


198 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


The church can not afford to compromise with capitalists. 
It does them a great injury when it does so. It has a message 
for the rich as well as for the poor, and it should faithfully 
present it. If it will convert the rich, it w*ill largely have 
the problem solved, for no true Christian will fail to let the 
laborer properly share in the profits of his business. Our Sa¬ 
viour certainly taught that none who placed their trust in un¬ 
certain riches could enter into the kingdom of God. Those 
who use their wealth for the purpose of making more money, 
simply to gratify an avaricious disposition and to secure the 
influence that wealth gives, certainly trust in uncertain riches. 
It must be admitted that the majority of capitalists do this 
very thing. Then they can not, of course, enter into the 

kingdom of God. The pulpit should be plain on this 

subject, and not have the blood of this class resting upon 

it. Let us have the zeal of the earlv Christians, and 

we will soon be able to send much surplus capital into the 
world doing good. This will greatly help to bring about the 
millennium. 

The church will never be able to fully command its re¬ 
sources until it returns to the unity and spirit of the apos¬ 
tolic church. If the church of the twentieth century had the 
liberality of-the church of the first century, it could soon settle 
the labor problem. When Cromwell saw in the cathedral sil¬ 
ver statues of the twelve apostles, lie ordered them to be coined 
into money, so that they might go about doing good. There 
is now hoarded up by professed Christians ten or twelve bil¬ 
lions of dollars which should bo going about doing good. A 
careful study of the New Testament from the standpoint of 
sociology would now do great good. Those who are giving 
some attention to this subject greatly deplore the divided con¬ 
dition of Christendom. Some Christian sociologists advocate 
co-operation on the part of all professed Christians; others 
favor organic union as it existed in the days of the apostles. 
Co-operation may prepare the way for something better; but 
all faithful students of the New Testament must work and 
pray for the unity that existed in the early church. When 


THE PROBLEMS OF THE CHURCH. 


199 


we have the unity for which Jesus prayed, then will the world 
soon be converted to Christ. “Neither for these alone do I 
pray, but for them also that believe on me through their word; 
that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in 'me, and 
I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may 
believe that thou didst send me” (John xvii. 20. 21). 


CHAPTER X. 
Problems of the State. 


The October number of Volume I. of the New Christian 
Quarterly contains an interesting editorial on “Christianity 
and Civil Government,” from which I take the introduction 
to this chapter: 

“The family, the church and the state, it is here held, are 
all divine institutions. They constitute a social trinity by 
which human welfare is conserved and promoted. They exist 
by divine authority because they grow out of fundamental 
human needs and are essential to the progress of the race. This 
is almost universally admitted as to the family and the church, 
but it is not so generally accepted as to the state. But that 
the state has high and important functions to discharge in the 
present state of the world, which are essential to the peace, the 
social order, and the security of men, and that their functions 
have their place in the general scheme of God's government 
of the world, admits of no reasonable doubt. ‘The powers that 
be’—in the civil order—‘are ordained of God.' It would be 
difficult to find stronger language asserting the divine right 
of either the family or the church. 

“It may be said in reply to this that if the state existed 
bv divine authority, and constituted anv part of God’s scheme 
for the management of the world, that God would have re¬ 
vealed and ordained one particular form of government as best 
adapted to men's needs, whether absolute monarchy, consti¬ 
tutional or limited monarchy, or democracy, and that no other 
form would have been recognized or tolerated. Xo doubt, if 
it had been left to men, they would have arranged it that way. 
But God is wiser than man. He could see that the same form 
of government would not have been adapted to all nations and 
peoples, in all ages, and so, instead of ordaining an ironclad 
form of civil government for all time and for all people, he 

has simply ordained that there shall be civil government, and 

200 


PROBLEMS OF THE STATE. 


201 


that men shall be subject to it, and left it with the people to give 
it such form as would best conserve the interests of society at 
any particular time or in any particular country, under the 
general guidance and inspiration of the principles and truths 
of his revealed religion.” 

SECTION I.-ORIGIN OF THE STATE. 

Aristotle claims that man is bv nature a political animal. 
It is certain, then, that the state has its origin in the nature 
of man. As God has created the nature of man, he has, at 
least mediately, created the state. The origin of the state was 
not by any social compact; but it grew out of man’s needs. We 
were born into the state as we were born into the family. 
Aristotle taught that the man who was connected with no' state 
was a monster, either above or below the level of human nature, 
and 'more likely to be below than above. This great philoso¬ 
pher contradicted the social contract theory of Epicurus long 
before its origination. lie knows of no time when a contract 
was made between savages, and he has no knowledge of a 
people entirely destitute of political order. Hone but polit¬ 
ical theorists have any news from a savage country where a 
social contract was made. 

The state is the institute of rights, which rights are im¬ 
plicit in our nature. There can be no harmonious develop¬ 
ment without them. They are properly stated in the second 
table of the Mosaic law as follows: The right of life, of family, 
of property, and of good name. These are all essential to our 
highest ethical culture. Herbert Spencer says that a man has 
the right to live outside of all political society. Be that as it 
may, it is certain that he could not develop thus his highest 
manhood. 

It is very evident that the state grew out of the family, 
for every family is really the state in miniature. Parents have 
to legislate, judge and execute law. The children, as depend¬ 
ents, are necessarily treated as subjects. Hr. Paley truly says: 
“A family contains the rudiments of an empire. The author¬ 
ity of one over many, and the disposition to govern and to be 


202 


MACROCOSJVIUS. 


governed, are in this' way incidental to the very nature, and 
coeval, no doubt, with the existence of the human species.” As 
time advanced, the children and grandchildren would gather 
around the tent of the patriarch ; so the government of one fam¬ 
ily would become the government of many families, all owning 
allegiance to a common ancestor. The Bible is certainly cor- 
rect in recognizing the patriarchal as the first form of civil 
government. The patriarch would finally gather around him 
so many followers that he would be able to- conquer other 
tribes, and thus the kingdom and empire were finally estab¬ 
lished. When we consider the authority of the patriarch, it is 
not difficult to understand why the ancient kingdoms were 
largely absolute monarchies. 

SECTION II.-THE PROGRESS OF THE STATE. 

It is interesting to trace, in Maine’s “Village Communi¬ 
ties, ” the gradual differentiation of the state from the family. 
In fact, for a long time the state was only the family extended, 
and the communism of the family w’as transferred to the state. 
The tribe forms the intermediate link between the family and 
the state. While the trihe is certainly not to be the permanent 
organization of mankind, it is a fact that it yet embraces the 
majority of the race. As Maine truly declares, the majority 
of mankind have stereotyped their institutions; and only a 
minority have succeeded in differentiating the state from the 
family. 

We-learn from Tacitus that our Teutonic ancestors had 
their village communities. Those communities are found in 
Hindoostan and Russia, with but little change, even to the 
present day. Even in Russia, each group of habitations is 
ruled bv a. pater familias. The pasture land is owned in com¬ 
mon; while the arable land is divided into lots, and cultivated 

according to the minute regulations of the community. The 

« 

Russian Government does not interfere with the regulations 
of these communities. It is really a successor of the Mongo¬ 
lian khans, and the Mongolian Government was not a legisla¬ 
tive despotism, but a tax-taking despotism. It is safe to state 


203 


PROBLEMS OF THE STATE. 

that among the Aryans we find at least the germ of the town 
meetings of New England. 

John Stuart Mill makes the Jews an exception to the sta¬ 
tionary tendency of other Asiatic nations. The following is 
his language: u The Jews, instead of being stationary, like other 
Asiatics, were, next to the Greeks, the most progressive people 
of antiquity, and, jointly with them, have been the starting- 
point and main propelling agency of modern civilization. He 
claims that the conditions of progress were favorable on account 
of the prophetic order. In this he is only partially correct; 
for the national progress of the Jews antedated the rise of the 
prophetic order to general influence. The founders of our own 
nation were diligent students of the Bible, and it is not surpris¬ 
ing til at' Dr. Franklin should find many striking points of re¬ 
semblance between the Jewish nation and the American com¬ 
monwealth. 

The ruinous fiction called the divine right of kings was an 
evolution from the paler familias of the village community. 
The most civilized nations of modern times only eliminated 

*j 

this fiction from the body politic by a bloody process. The 
fetish was largely destroyed in England by the successful re¬ 
volt against the Stuarts nearly three centuries ago. When 
Charles I. was executed as any other traitor, and no calamity 
sent upon the nation for it, the people began to open their eyes. 
When Charles II. was restored, the fiction was somewhat re¬ 
vived ; but his conduct and that of James IT. were so shocking 
that the English nation had no further use for the doctrine of 
a divine right of kings. 

France freed herself from the theory of a divine right by 
a shocking revolution. It led to the execution of Louis XVI. 
and the establishment of a republic. This was overthrown 
by Napoleon 1., and there was quite a reaction in France in 
favor of monarchy. Progress, however, would not allow this 
to continue, and another republic was established. This was 
overthrown by the treacherous Louis Napoleon, whose crime is 
graphically described by the patriotic Victor Hugo. Napoleon 
the Little met a just fate in the Franco-Prussian War; and 


204 


MACROCOSMUS. 


France established another republic, which continues to the 
present time. 

Germany yet holds to the theory of a divine right of kings, 
but a revolution there will come. Prussians are the finest edu¬ 
cated people in the world, and despotism there must give way. 
A revolution may be prevented by proper concessions on the 
part of the emperor, but the liberty-loving Germans will not 
permit a king any more than a pope to tyrannize over them. 

America -has been freer from the fictions of the past than 
any other country upon the face of the earth. Our Puritan 
forefathers came to this country in order to establish a com¬ 
monwealth where they could enjoy both religious and political 
liberty. Their church government was a pure democracy, and 

one man’s vote counted as much as that of anv other man in the 

«/ 

community. Their secular affairs were managed upon precisely 
the same principles as the religious. Republicanism has had 
a fair chance in America; for those who laid the foundations of 
our institutions had long repudiated the doctrine of a divine 
right of kings and a privileged aristocracy. The American 
Government is certainly the most perfect that has ever been 
known in the history of mankind. As we occupy the terminal 
point in traveling westward, it seems also that our Government 
occupies the terminal point in the progress of governmental 
science. The following is the language of De Toqueville con¬ 
cerning our Government more than sixty years ago: “Nothing 
is more striking to a European traveler in the United States 
than the absence of what we term the Government or the Ad¬ 
ministration. Written laws exist in America, and one sees the 
daily execution of them; but although everything moves reg- 
ularlv, the mover can nowhere be discovered. The hand which 
directs the social machine is invisible. Nevertheless, as all 
persons must have recourse to certain grammatical forms which 
are the foundation of human language, in order to express their 
thought, so all communities are obliged to secure their exist¬ 
ence by submitting to a certain amount of authority, without 
which they fall into anarchy. This authority may be dis¬ 
tributed in several wavs, but it must always exist somewhere.” 

1 / •/ 


PROBLEMS OF THE STATE. 


205 


SECTION III.-THE MISSION OF THE STATE. 

The state is not intended simply for princes and classes, 
but for the whole people. Bentham expressed it thus: “The 
greatest good of the greatest number.” Jefferson improved on 
this in the following language: “All men have the inalienable 
right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Justice is 
the right of all; and any state which does not recognize this 
higher law, is behind in the progress of civilization. To se¬ 
cure justice among men, governments were instituted; and to 
secure this as far as possible, is the tendency of modern thought. 

We have now reached that stage of progress in which all 
authority emanates from the people, and if all do not get jus¬ 
tice it is because of a lingering prejudice and superstition 
among the people. The remedy for the evils of society is 
largely in the hands of the people, and they should select just 
and experienced representatives to make and administer their 
laws. Mr. Lecky, in his “History of England in the Eigh¬ 
teenth Century,” fully recognizes this principle. These are 
lffs words: “One of the most difficult problems which the fram¬ 
ers of constitutions are called upon to solve is that of provid¬ 
ing that the direction of affairs shall be habituallv in the hands 

O v 

iff men of very exceptional ability, and at the same time pre¬ 
venting the instability, insecurity and alarm which perpetual 
and radical changes in the government must produce.” 

Civil society is an institution of God; for men were created 
to live together in a social civilized state. It seems to me that, 
man’s moral and social constitution makes civil government a 
necessity, and that the civil state is really the natural state for 
man. All traditions connected with barbarism tend to show 
that it is largely a deterioration. The state, then, did not origi¬ 
nate in a social compact; and those writers are wrong who refer 
to this fiction as the ground of obedience to law. W e were 
born in civil society, and subject to law. The mission of the 
state, therefore, is to see that we all have justice. All its regu¬ 
lations should be strictly in harmony with the principles of 
justice. 


206 


MACROCOSM US. 


Tlie powers of government are derived from the state. The 
supreme power is not in the government, but in the state. The 
fundamental law of the state is justice, and the authority of 
the state is limited by this fundamental law. It is certain, 
therefore, that the state has no rightful power to establish an 
unjust government, or to perform an unjust act. If civil gov¬ 
ernment was better understood, it would greatly assist in the 
solution of some very important problems. 

It is, of course, the duty of the state to protect the rights 
of all, and this implies the authority to punish those who vio¬ 
late the law. Liberty and law are in perfect harmony; in fact, 
there can be no true liberty without law. Those persons are 
entirely wrong who suppose that liberty is the absence of law. 
The law against theft does not abridge a man’s liberty; for 
no one has a right to steal. The law against murder does not 
interfere with the libertv of man ; for no man ever had the right 
to murder. The law, then, is essential to true liberty; for we 
could not enjoy our rights if the penalty of the law were not 
enforced against those who violate them. Man can claim free¬ 
dom to do right, but he has no right to do wrong; and when 
he willfully violates the law, his punishment is necessary to the 
general welfare. No punishment should be inflicted which is 
not. for the general welfare. Severe punishment for minor 
crimes tends to make the community look upon all crimes alike. 
In Texas and some other States they seem to esteem theft, worse 


than murder, and in some cases punish it more severely. The 
state should inflict any punishment that is necessary for its 
own defense and for the defense of its citizens. Says one, Has 
it the right to inflict capital punishment? I answer, it has, if 
capital punishment is essential to its own defense and that of 
the people. Tf the individual has a right to defend his life, 
liberty or property, by taking the life of the assailant, the 
state certainly has a right to do the same thing. Considering 
the important mission of the state, the following duties are in¬ 
cumbent upon every citizen: (1) It is the duty of all to rec¬ 
ognize the authority of the government under which they live. 
(2) Obedience to the laws of the state is incumbent upon every 


PROBLEMS OF THE STATE. 


207 


citizen. I he Bible clearly teaches this. “Let every soul be 
subject, unto the higher powers. Jb or there is no power but of 
God: the powers that be are ordained of God”(Rom. xiii. 1-7). 
W hen the civil law r violates the law of God, then the civil law 
is, of course, to be rejected, for God’s law is the highest in the 
universe, and any law that is out of harmony with it is without 
authority. “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 
v. 29. (3) It is the duty of each citizen to help support his 

government. (4) Each citizen should be willing to do what he 
can to defend his country in an hour of danger. True patriot¬ 
ism will, at least, require this at his hands. (5) AH 
officials should remember that civil government is some¬ 
thing more than a machine, and that they should discharge 
their duties in the spirit and aims of uprightness and benevo¬ 
lence. The New Testament teaches that these duties should 
be performed with a loving and an earnest spirit, “as to the 
Lord, and not unto men.” What is, then, known as the “spoils 

system” is entirely out of harmony with a true Christian civ- 

•/ •/ 

ilization. 


SECTION IV.-THE BIBLE ANT) CIVTL GOVERNMENT. 

The Jewish nation was a typical nation, and the Old Tes¬ 
tament is the key to national life. This book teaches that, every 

«y fj 

nation has an unseen king, and when his laws are violated, that 
nation suffers. In fact, nations are held responsible for their 
conduct as well as individuals, and the nations of the past have 
perished on account of their sins. It is well for nations Li 
remove kings who tend to hide from the people the divine King. 
I am glad that I live in a country which recognizes the unseen 
King. The Supreme Court of the United States has decided 
that our country is a Christian country. We must discriminate 

• / ty 

between a theocracy and a hierocracv. In a hierocracy the 
church and state have not been differentiated from each other. 
We are in favor of a theocracy, but not of a hierocracv. A 
theocratic nation is simply one that acknowledges the supreme 
authority of God. A nation that does not do this will certainly 
perish. • , 



208 


MACROCOSMUS. 


It is said that when a friend found seven editions of the 
Greek Testament in the library of Rufus Choate, and not a 
copy of the Constitution, he inquired the cause of this. The 
reply was: “The Constitution of unv country is in them all.” 
The Bible is a book of principles, and not a book of rules. 
Right living depends upon right principles; and we are willing 
for the Bible to be judged by this standard. The tree is known 
by its fruit. 

Infidels have made many attacks upon the law of Moses, 
but it continues impregnable. All law must either be given 
from without as a means of education, or be simply custom as 
the result of slow growth. The law of Moses was superior <0 
the nation that received it, and it consequently came from with¬ 
out. That is, it contained a revelation from God. Modern 
civilization is specially indebted to the work of three great 
nations; viz.: The Hebrew, the Greek and the Roman. Pilate's 
inscription over the cross seems to have been an unconscious 
prophecy of the triumphs of Christ’s kingdom over the nations 
of the world. 

The influence of the Mosaic law upon Greek thought was 
great. In fact, the Old Testament was translated into the 
Greek language nearly three centuries before the Christian era. 
there can be no question that the Greeks were well acquainted 
with the law of Moses long before this; for Palestine was 
really the highway of the nations. Tt was at the junction of 
three great continents: so that the law of Moses could not other¬ 
wise than have had a verv extended influence. Have you ever 

v %j 

thought of the fact that the Mosaic law is the only ancient law 
that has come down to us entire ? What has become of the laws 
of Cyrus, Solon, Lycurgus, Xuma, and others? The historian 
Prideaux claims that Aristot.le was acquainted with the law's 
of Moses. Clement of Alexandria, a profound student of the 
Platonic philosophy, declares that Plato v*as under obligations 
to the Mosaic law 7 . Professor Haven, in his “History .of An¬ 
cient and Modern Philosophy,” says: “Chief among these re¬ 
ligious systems of the east-in practical influence on the Grecian 


200 


PROBLEMS OF THF, STATE. 

mind was the Jewish theology as presented in the Hebrew 
Scriptures.” 

it is scarcely necessary to> discuss the influence of Grecian 
laws upon the Homan, for this is universally admitted. Cicero 
declares that the Twelve Tables were borrowed from the laws of 
Greece. Gibbon quotes the statements of Livy, that the depu¬ 
ties of Rome visited Athens in the times of Pericles; and that 
the laws of Solon were incorporated into the Twelve Tables. 
Through, the Greeks the Mosaic law influenced the Roman. All 
students of law well know the influence of Roman law upon 
the English. Professor Peabody, of Harvard, was a favorite 
lecturer with me. I present the following note from one of 
his lectures: “The influence of Christian ethics upon the Roman 
law is in the following particulars. Historically (1) the seat 
of the Roman Empire was transferred to Constantinople; (2) 
not one of the law-reforming emperors was of Roman birth or 
lineage; (3) reformation of the law in the precise direction of 
Christian thought ; (4) the law-reforming emperors were Con¬ 
stantine and Justinian, and they were both under a dominating 
Christian influence.” I heard Theodore Woolsey, ex-president 
of Yale University, in a series of lectures at the Boston Uni- 
versity, and he fully confirmed the language of Professor Pea¬ 
body. Yot long since, I read the “Spirit of the Laws/’ by 
Montesquieu, and was much impressed with the dependence of 
the law upon the Bible. Micliaelis, long a professor of law at 
the University of Gottingen, says: “A man who would consider 
laws philosophically, who would survey them with the eye of 
a Montesquieu, would never overlook the laws of Moses.” 
Blackstone, the great commentator, says: “Upon these two foun¬ 
dations—the law of nature and the law of revelation—depend 
all human laws.” Chancellor Kent, in his Law Commentaries, 
claims that the ideas of right and justice among the govern- 
ments of Europe largely depend upon the influence of Chris¬ 
tianity. 



210 


MACROCOSMUS. 


SECTION V.-THE BIBLE AND HUMAN LIBERTY. 


Edward Everett declared that God and liberty were the two 
master ideas of all benevolent movements. Historv fully illus* 
trates the truth of this declaration. The influence of the Bible 
upon liberty is shown in the fact that it has led to the abolition 
of slavery, the elevation of woman, and the true dignity of 
human labor. 

1. While liberty is man’s normal state, the history of the 
world has been largely the history of slavery. The pyramids 
of Egypt were built by slaves. The Greeks exalted slavery in 
their laws, and some of their brightest writers were slaves. 
The same thing can be said of the Romans. Epictetus, Ter¬ 
ence, and many other eminent writers, were slaves. At one 
time slaves were sold for less than a dollar per head. Nearly 
flve hundred thousand slaves were added to the empire bv 
Caesar’s Gallic wars alone. Slaves were not counted as persons, 
but only as property. The way in which they were branded 
would now be considered even cruelty to animals. Plutarch 
says that the Roman Flaminius put a slave to death to' show a 
guest what the agonies of death are, because his guest had never 
seen a man die. Slaves were frequently crucified in order that 
their masters might gloat upon their tortures. 

It is certainly a fact that the civilization of the ancient 
world largely rested upon slaves. While Christianity did not 
at. once abolish slavery, its principles gradually undermined 
it. While a central fact of the old civilization was slavery, a 
central fact of Christianitv is liberty. Christianity made the 

«/ %J <j 

slave a brother, and the early church treated the master and 
the slave alike. Mr. Leckv says: “The spirit of Christianity 
moved over this chaotic society, and not merely alleviated the 
evils that convulsed it, but also reorganized it on a new basis. 
It. did this in three ways: it abolished slavery, it created char¬ 
ity, it inculcated self-sacrifice.” 

2. It is difficult to fully appreciate the degradation of 
woman previous to- Christianity. It is certain that the loveliest 
of the race was largely treated as a beast of burden. The same 


PROBLEMS OF THE STATE. 


21 


thing is true at the present time, among unchristian nations. 
In all the Orient, women bear the severest burdens. A sacred 
Hindoo book declares that a woman has no god but her hus¬ 
band, even if lie be a drunkard or a debauchee. Wherever 
Christianity has prevailed, woman has been greatly elevated. 
Caleb Cushing, the great lawyer, says: “The Christian religion 
levels upward ; elevating all men to the same high standard of 
sanctity, faith and spiritual promise on earth as in heaven. 
Just so it is wherever Christianity is taught it inevitably dig- 
nifies and exalts the female character/’ 

« 

3. Christianity has greatly dignified human labor. The 
Greeks and Romans looked upon labor as disgraceful. Augus¬ 
tus condemned a Senator to death for engaging in a trade. 
Even the immortal Plato thought that a shopkeeper should be 
punished as a criminal. Aristotle thought that in a perfect 
state no citizen would be a- mechanic. The Bible teaches the 
opposite. From the beginning of creation it was designed that 
man should labor. Agriculture was a very early culture, and 
no state can prosper without it. In the very face of Greek and 
Roman contempt for labor, every Jew was compelled to learn 
a trade. Jesus was himself a carpenter, and, notwithstanding 
Roman opposition to labor, he chose his apostles from the work¬ 
ingmen of Galilee. Paul says: “If any man will not work, 
neither shall he eat.” 

Wherever the Bible is read, it gives liberty to man, woman 
and child. Our forefathers understood this, when, in the dark¬ 
est hour of the Revolution, the American Congress imported 
twenty thousand Bibles to be distributed among the colonies. 


De Tocqueville thus speaks on the. subject: “Religion is the 
companion of liberty in all its battles.” ITe further says: 
“Xone but a religious people can bear liberty.” Mr. Webster, 
in his Bunker TIill oration, speaking of the Pilgrims, says: 
“The Bible came with them. And it is not to be doubted that 
to the free and universal reading of the Bible in that age, men 
were indebted for right views of civil liberty.” T might quote 
from Mr. Bancroft and many others; but we have given suf¬ 
ficient to show the influence of the Bible upon human liberty. 


212 


MACROCOSMUS. 


SECTION VI.-THE STATE AND ITS PROBLEMS. 

I have discussed, in former chapters, nearly all of the prob¬ 
lems that will be mentioned in this section 5 so I will be brief 
in what I have to say upon each problem. 

1 . We have our public schools for the problem of illiteracy. 
If they can have a fair chance, they will solve it. The infidel 
wants to secularize the public school, and the Catholic wants to 
Romanize it. If infidelity can banish the Bible from our public 
schools, then infidelity will largely take its place. The question 
which, then, presents itself is this: Is the atmosphere of the 
dogmatic sect of atheism a better environment for the youth of 
the land than Christianitv ? Burke, Webster, and all other 
great statesmen, would answer in the negative. It is a fact 
that infidelity once drove the Bible from the schools of Ger¬ 
many, but it has been restored. It is now almost universally 
admitted in Germany that the Bible is essential in order to de¬ 
velop the highest elements in the child’s nature. An educated 
German looks with contempt upon the allegation that the Bible 
is a sectarian book. Pestalozzi, the greatest of educational re¬ 
formers, encouraged the study of the Bible by the voung. 
Since the Supreme Court of the United States has decided that 
the nation is Christian, it becomes, then, a duty on the part of 
the authorities to see that the Bible is used in the public schools. 
Each State should recognize its obligations as part of a Chris¬ 
tian nation. 

The public does not fully understand the position of the 
Catholics on this subject. They object not so much to the read¬ 
ing of the Bible in the public schools as they do to the seculari¬ 
zation of the schools. The rejection of the Bible, they think, 
would make the schools even more godless than they are at the 
present time. The Romanists want to sectarianize the schools, 
if the Bible is crowded out on account of the objection of a 
few infidels, it will greatly assist the Catholics in their efforts 
to subvert the public school system. 

2 . T have for years given some attention to the Mormon 
problem. A few summers ago I spent several days in Salt Lake 


PROBLEMS OE THE STATE. 


213 


Oity. We are perfectly willing to give the Mormons full credit 
for what they have added to the material prosperity of the coun- 
try. The capital of Utah is certainly one of the most* beautiful 
cities in America. The Mormon religion, however, is a cari¬ 
cature of the Christian civilization of the most enlightened 
nation on the globe. That polygamy should be practiced for half 


.1 centum in a country where woman is so highly honored, is a 
burning shame. I am glad that the iron heel of the nation has 
been placed upon the head of this Mormon monster. Even Mor¬ 
mons themselves admit that polygamy is doomed. The Mormon 
priesthood is a political as well as a religious despotism, and it 
may give the Government trouble for some time to come. The 
admission of Utah, as a State, before it has fully come under 
Gentile influence, may do barm. Under Gentile influence, the 
power of the priesthood will be so undermined that the des¬ 
potism will largely give way, and the people of Utah will enjoy 
that civil and religious liberty which the Constitution of the 
United States guarantees. 


3. The problem of Romanism is indeed a difficult problem. 
Romanism is a lingering despotism, which it will take years 
of progress to overcome. It would be as difficult to be per¬ 
fectly loyal to Rome, and perfectly loyal to our Government, 
as it would to ride two- horses going in an opposite direction. 
(1) Our Constitution guarantees liberty of conscience. Pope 
Pius IX. said : “The absurd or erroneous doctrines or ravings 
in defense of liberty of conscience are a most pestilential error 
—a pest, of all others, most to be dreaded in a state.” The same 
pope anathematized all who asserted liberty of conscience and 
of worship ; and, also 1 , such as maintained that the church 
should not employ force. (2) Our Constitution requires obe¬ 
dience to the laws of the United States. Romanism requires 
obedience to the Pope first. The principles of Rome being 
diametrically opposed to those of the United States, it is evident 
that no man can be loyal to our Government and be perfectly 
loyal to Rome at the same time. Many Catholics, ho'ever, are 
beyond their creed, and will not submit to- the dictation of the 
Jesuits. In fact, the Roman clergy in America are not bv any 


214 


/ 


MACROCOSMUS. 


means a unit; and, as civilization advances, the despotism 
of Papal Rome will gradually give way as did that of pagan 
Rome. 

4. The liquor problem has already been discussed, but I 
want to say a few more things just here. There can be no 
question that this traffic is the greatest curse of our age. It is 
directly related to almost every crime. It is the principal cause 
of municipal misrule. Besides, the liquor power has become a 
great political organization; and it will rule the nation unless 
crushed out by the moral consciousness of the American people. 
It is a worse evil than slavery ever was, and will have to he 
crushed by the iron heel of the nation. The nation has a con¬ 
science as well as the individual, and we can see that it is be¬ 
coming aroused upon many social evils. The spoils system is 
now almost universally condemned, and there is a cry for re¬ 
form coming up from every quarter. I believe the national 
conscience will ultimately banish from this beautiful country 
the ruinous liquor traffic. 

5. Socialism presents some of the most difficult problems 
of the acre, One Great difficulty with socialists is that in their 

o o t 

efforts to do awav with human suffering:, they fail to consider 
the fact that man is a sinner. They talk much of fraternity, 
but would have about such fraternity as the French had during 
the Revolution. In fact, there can be no true fraternity with¬ 
out a common Father. The Fatherhood of God is essential to 
a universal brotherhood on the pari of mankind. Many of the 
Utopian schemes of modern socialists have been tried and found 
wanting. For example, the nationalization of land. National 
ownership, even in the economic sphere, is maintained in India, 
China and Japan. There is certainly nothing very encouraging 
in the scheme when we compare those nations with the nations 
of Furope and America. As we have already shown, the State 
should do what it can to promote co-operation, profit-sharing, 
and a more equal distribution of the products of labor, but no 
State-help can be a substitute for self-help. When the prin¬ 
ciples of Christianity are fully carried out, all social problems 
will be solved. 


PROBLEMS OF THE STATE. 


216 


fl- Mammonism is one of the crying evils of our day. The 
United States is the richest nation upon the face of the earth. 
1 he billionaire is rapidly coming, and ancient Rome never had 
for an emperor a more ruthless tyrant than is he. The danger 
of mammonism is daily becoming more intense; and it is one 


of the 'most trying problems connected with the Anglo-Saxon 
race. It brings upon us a gross materialism; it leads to licen¬ 
tiousness, and it tends to concentrate the wealth of the nation 
into the hands of a few men, which is entirely out of harmony 
with our republican institutions. Some defenders of property 
seem to think that the mission of the State is to serve mammon, 
and that it should specially protect them in robbing the people. 
A Christian nation must regard the interest of persons as more 
important than that of property, and only regard private prop¬ 
erty as it tends to promote the ethical progress of mankind. 
While I aim perfectly satisfied that no individual can honestly 
acquire property enough to injure a community, it is certainly 
the duty of the State to abolish or control any corporation which 
acquires wealth against the true interest of the people. 

7. The race problem is rapidly solving itself. There has 
been much written in reference to the Indian; but it‘is evident 
that the Indian must accept civilization or perish. I have al¬ 
ways been much interested in the Indian, and have studied him 
in several States and Territories. This much is to my mind 
quite certain: a portion of the Indian race will accept civiliza¬ 
tion, live as other civilized races, and the rest will perish. The 
Independent gives the following causes of the great Sioux out¬ 
break a few years ago: (1) Dissatisfaction with the advance 
of civilization. (2) Opposition of an influential party of In¬ 
dians to the reduction of the great Sioux Reservation into sev¬ 
eral smaller reservations. (3) The failure of Congress to speed¬ 
ily fulfill the promises made by the Commission, in 1889, 
especially the restoration of diminished rations. (4) The par¬ 
tial failure of the crops of 1889, caused by drought and by the 
absence of the Indians from their lands in attendance on the 
councils with the Commission. (5) The bitter opposition of 
the Rosebud Indians to the census, confirmed by a second cen- 


216 


MACROCOSMUS. 


sus, which reduced the number of Indians at Rosebud by 2,100. 
(6) The fright and anger occasioned by the sudden appearance 
of the military among them. (7) The Messiah craze. 

After studying the problem for years, I am convinced that 
the whole reservation system is a mistake. The land should be 
divided among the Indians, and they should become citizens 
of the United States, the same as others. I met at an Indian 
school a young Indian teacher, who was one of the most accom¬ 
plished young ladies I have ever met. She was educated in 
a Kentucky school. The Indians, the same as others, should be 
educated in our public schools. 

I was brought up in Kentucky with the negro race; and it 
is to me quite amusing to read articles in Eastern journals in 
reference to the oppression of the blacks. The best friends of 
ihe negro race are the former masters. I have lived North, 
Soutli, East and West, and I know that the Southern people 
have more sympathy with the negro than have the people in 
any other section of the country. They divide their school 
funds with them, and help them in many ways. The question 
of intimidation at elections has been greatly exaggerated. In 
fact, I ha've never known any of it in any part of the country 
where I have lived. The facts are, the negro race is doing well, 
and is well contented. Who ever heard of a negro committing 
suicide ? I have never yet met a negro beggar. In God’s prov¬ 
idence the education of the negro race in America will be a 
great means in enlightening the Dark Continent. The evan¬ 
gelization of Africa will be one of the great problems of the 
twentieth century. I am truly glad that the President of the 
United States, a few vears ago, saved the country from national 
disgrace in its relation to China. The whole nation rejoiced at 
the Burlingame treaty; but, through the influence of the hood¬ 
lum class, came near disgracing itself with China. Not long 
since, I spent several weeks in San Francisco, and I spent much 
of the time in studying the Chinese. I studied Chinatown 
above and below; and while some of the Chinese are above and 
some below, I do not consider the Chinese sinners above all 
others. While it might be well to exclude from our shores the 


PROBLEMS OF THE STATE. 


91 T 

I 

criminal and pauper classes of all nations, I can see no' good 
reason for specially discriminating against the Chinese, While 
some good people in California are opposed to the Chinese, I 
a>m satisfied that the opposition is largely promoted by the hood¬ 
lum element. The geographical position of the United States 
will ultimately make her commercial relations to China a very 
important thing. There is but little in the statement that 
America will be overrun by China. We have no evidence what¬ 
ever that-this will be the case. In fact, experts claim that the 
population of China has decreased within the past century. 
Americans should consider the fact that Christian America 
owes something to the Celestial Empire. As Christian civili¬ 
zation .travels westward, it becomes the duty of America to 
evangelize the Orient. 

I have great confidence in the Anglo-Saxon race as designed, 
in God’s providence, to be the special promoters of the highest 
civilization. The wonderful growth of the naval and commer¬ 
cial power of England, from the days of Cromwell to those of 
Lord Chatham, had much to do with the colonization of North 
America. When she thus became mistress of the sea, Eng¬ 
land seized upon the keys of empire in all parts of the world. 
No thoughtful person can fail to observe that there is now 
going on in Africa much the same thing that was going on in 
America in the seventeenth century. The foundation of An¬ 
glo-Saxon civilization is being laid there as it was laid here 
several centuries ago. Look also at Australia, nearly as large 
as the United States. It affords wonderful facility for the 
enlargement of Anglo-Saxon influence. The English language 
is rapidly becoming the universal language. The prophecy 
of Grimm, the German, and of Candolle, the Frenchman, is 
being rapidly fulfilled; namely, that the language of Shake¬ 
speare would ultimately become the language of mankind. It 
may also be that the principles of federation in America will 
ultimately force federalism upon Europe. Says one, Divers 
languages will prevent this. Certainly not, for Switzerland 
has taught a different lesson. The time will coane when Eu¬ 
rope will be unable to keep up her large standing armies, and 


2 IS 


MACROCOSM US. 


compete in the commercial world with America. The United 
States will soon do away with that shameful tariff, called pro¬ 
tective, for the people are discussing it., and discussion will 
soon doom it. We will have in its place universal reciprocity. 
Then will the United States compete with Europe in all the 
great markets of the world. Europe will be compelled to dis¬ 
band her large armies, and European states will be forced into 
a federation for their own protection. International questions 
will be settled by international law, and the nations will know 
war no more. We will then truly have a millennium, and a 
Christian civilization will triumph in the world. Then will be 
realized the beautiful sentiment of Tennyson—the parliament 
of man and the federation of the world. 


Book III. 

THE GOLDEN MEAN PHILOSOPHY IN THE SOLU¬ 
TION OF THE GREATEST PROBLEMS. 

PART I. 

The Greatest Problems in Biology, Anthropology, Phi¬ 
losophy and Sociology. 

INTRODUCTION. 

In the history of philosophy we find extreme tendencies. 
There has been, on the one hand, a tendency to an extreme 
realism, which has led to materialism and atheism. On the 
other hand, there has been a tendency to an extreme idealism, 
which has led to pantheism and rationalism. We find these 
extremes in ancient Greek philosophy. The Socratic school, 
however, occupied the golden mean. Socrates, Plato and Aris¬ 
totle were true philosophers. Aristotle taught the golden mean , 
and ibis enabled him to avoid the extreme to which other svs- 

«y 

terns tended. 

In modern times, Germany represents the idealistic ten- 
dencv, and Prance the materialistic. Both countries have con- 

t / 

sequently been deluged with skepticism. Kant, however, occu¬ 
pied the golden mean in Germany, and Cousin occupied the 
golden mean in France. The Germans now want to go back to 
Kant, and this is certainly a healthy tendency. 

In Great Britain, Locke and Hamilton occupied the golden 
mean; and in America this position must be given to McCosh, 
Porter and Mark ITopkins. The golden mean philosophy solves 
the greatest problems in all departments of culture. In all the 
departments of science, the greatest thinkers have become 
philosophers, and it is not improper to speak of a scientific 
philosophy, or of a philosophy of science. 



220 


MACROCOSMUS. 


CHAPTER I. 

The Greatest Problems in Biology. 

WHAT IS LIFE \ 

The word “biology’ 7 is composed of two Greek words— bios, 
life, and logos, a discourse. It is the science that treats of ail 
living things. It requires much more than simply the ability 
to distinguish the different kinds of living beings so as to be 
able io label dead specimens in a cabinet. This science involves 
the study of life from every standpoint. The question, “What 
is life?’' has been a great problem in all ages. Some GreeK 
philosophers claimed that it was the result of harmony in dif¬ 
ferent parts of the body, and those who claim that life is the 
result of organization, take about the same view. We had as 
well say that an architect is the result of a house as to say that 
life results from organization. Even Professor Huxley claims 
that organization is the result of life. A living thing is a 
spiritual essence which clothes itself with material particles 
according to a law of its own kind. I agree with President 
Porter, of Yale, that life is the very soul of all living things. 

WHENCE CAME LIFE ? 

From the days of Aristotle to the present time, there have 
been advocates of the doctrine of abiogenesis. This dectrine 
teaches that life may arise de novo; that is, be spontaneously 
generated. Aristotle taught that some animals sprang from 
putrid matter, and that certain insects sprang from dew upon 
plants. He also taught that certain worms originated in the 
mud of wells and running waters, and that fleas came from 
certain portions of corrupted matter. When I was a boy, I 
was taught that if horsehairs were thrown into water, they 
would become eels. 

r Phe greatest advocate of spontaneous generation in recent 
times was Dr. IT. C. Bastian, in his interesting work on “Be¬ 
ginnings of Life.” He claims that both observation and ex¬ 
periment. teach that living matter is constantly being formed 
de novo, in obedience to the same laws which determine the 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN BIOLOGY. 


221 


more simple chemical combinations. Professor Tyndall and 
others have thoroughly tested the theory, and have completely 
overthrown it. Dr. Tyndall, by a discovery of his own, has 
thoroughly established the fact that matter in a germless air 
will never yield life. Professor Huxley, in his “Critiques and 
Addresses,” proclaims the fact that biogenesis, or life only from 
life, is victorious along the whole line at the present time. We 
may conclude this question in the language of Harvey: “Omne 
vivurn ex.vivo:'' 

THE RELATION OF THE VEGETABLE TO THE MINERAL. 

While the vegetable depends upon the mineral, there are 
important differences between them. The vegetable comes 
from a seed, which is not true of the mineral. It is now quite 
generally conceded that there is no such thing as spontaneous 
generation. There is a relation of interdependence between life 
and organization. They imply each other, and clearly indicate 
that they came from a higher power. Life is essential to or¬ 
ganization, and organization is necessary to a manifestation 
of life. 

The vegetable and mineral differ in their composition and 
structure. The mineral really has no composition, but simply 
aggregation. It may have two or more elements. In the vege- 
table there are always at least three elements, one of which is 
carbon. The vegetable also differs from the mineral in its 
structure. It consists of parts performing functions, and these 
parts are mutually related to each other, and to the whole. The 
parts are related as means to ends. The vegetable and mineral 
differ in their mode of preservation. In the mineral the indi¬ 
vidual is preserved as long as the species. In the vegetable 
the species is preserved, while the individual dies. Agencies 
without accomplish all the changes that take place in the min¬ 
eral, while in the vegetable growth and decay take place from 
agencies within. 

The vegetable differs from the mineral in the fact that it 
has life, while the mineral has none. The great problem is, 


222 


MACROCOSMUS. 


Whence came this life? It certainly did not come from the 
mineral; for life can not come from the lifeless. It requires 
the power of God to give life. 

THE RELATION OF THE ANIMAL TO THE VEGETABLE. 

There is an intimate relationship between the animal and 
vegetable; vet there are manv differences. They largely differ 
in composition, yet there are exceptions. We always find in 
the vegetable, oxygen, hydrogen and carbon. We find much 
more nitrogen in the animal. The peculiar smell of burning 
meat indicates the presence of nitrogen. 

The structure of the animal is very different from that of 
the vegetable. The animal has muscles and nerves. The vege¬ 
table has none of these things. The vegetable is nourished by 
unorganized matter, but the animal feeds upon the vegetable, 
and upon that which is organized. 

The great difference between the animal and the vegetable 
is the fact that the animal has sensation and voluntary motion, 
and the vegetable has neither. Washington could use his • 
hatchet on a cherry-tree, and confess his fault; but if he had 
used it upon the hind leg of a mule, he never could have even 
been tempted to tell a lie. Sensation is the great distinguish¬ 
ing characteristic between the animal and the vegetable. It 
may not always be possible to draw the line, but there is a line. 
If there is sensation, it is animal; if there is no sensation, it 
is vegetable. 

O 

THE RELATION OF MAN TO THE ANIMAL. 

That there is a very intimate relationship between the ani¬ 
mal and man, no student of science can for a moment question. 
It must also be admitted that there are some very important 
differences. 

Man is the only animal that is really two-footed and two- 
handed. In him the upper extremity is relieved from all use 
in locomotion. This leaves him hands with which to subdue 
nature, and by his erect position he h enabled to study God’s 
works. I believe it is also true that man is the only animal 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN BIOLOGY. 


223 


who has a chin. I have had the privilege of hearing the cele¬ 
brated Mark Hopkins lecture, and he claimed that there is 
something wrong in the upper story when a man is destitute 
of chin. 

While the animal has an instinctive reason, it can not reason 
abstractly, as does man. Even if it does recognize a thing as 
white, it can not know whiteness. I do not think an animal 
can even know space; but if it can, it certainly can not know 
that space is infinite. On account of these physical and intel¬ 
lectual deficiencies, the animal can make no progress. Each 
generation of animals commences where the previous one began, 
and makes about the same round. 

It is verv evident that man differs from the animal in hav- 
ing a moral and religious nature. In the dog and some other 
animals, there seems to be something approaching a perception 
of moral relations, but it is not the thing itself. The brute has 
no knowledge of moral law, and is not subject to it. I have 
known dogs to go to church regularly, but they did not go there 
to worship. The brute has no master beyond unan, and knows 
nothing of God and immortality. It simply acts from impulse, 
and has no ability to choose its own supreme end. It can not, 
consequently, become angel, fool or devil. 

THE RELATION OF THE MTND TO THE BODY. 

In my work entitled “Struggles and Triumphs of the 
Truth,'” I discuss the “Reciprocal Relationship of the Mind and 
the Bodv.’ 7 It is very evident that the mind has a wonderful 
influence over the body, and vice versa . Emotion and will pro¬ 
duce a wonderful influence upon the corporeal organization. A 
person may be very hungry, and receive intelligence which ren¬ 
ders him unable to eat at all. The mind acts upon the body 
through, its threefold states of intellect, sensibilities and will. 
The celebrated John Hunter says: “I am confident I can fix 
my attention to any part until I have a sensation in that part.*’ 
The great influence of attention upon the sensory ganglia is 
shown in the ability to recall a visual impression after a long 
interval of time. Sir Isaac Newton says he once looked at the 


224 


MACROCOSM US. 


sun for a long time in a mirror. He then went into a dark 
room, and by thought could have the spectrum return. By con¬ 
centrating his fancy upon them, he could have the light and 
colors as vivid as when he has just looked at the sun. Finally 
ho had to shut himself up in a dark room to divert his imagina¬ 
tion from the sun; for if he thought of him, the image would 
return, although he was in the dark. It is an axiom in science 
that every part of the body sympathizes with the mind, for 
whatever affects the mind affects also the body. St. Francis 
d’Assisi, one day when exhausted by fasting and prayer, imag¬ 
ined that God ordered him to open the Bible,, that he might 
therein learn his will. The book was opened three times, and 
every time at a description of Christ’s suffering. The pious 
monk regarded this as a sign that he should realize the Sa¬ 
viour's sufferings more vividly than he ever had before. He 
carried this so far that he suffered pains in his hands and feet, 
which resulted in inflammation, and finallv in ulceration. 

It is evident that the influence of the body upon the mind 
is fully as great as the influence of the mind upon the body. 
God made man in his own image. This applies to the body ns 
well as to the mind. “So God created man in his own image, 
in the image of God created he him; male and female created 
he them” (Gen. i. 27). There is nothing else in the universe 
so much like God as is man. Christ did not take the nature 
of angels, but he became a descendant of Abraham. The time 
will come when the saints will judge angels. The body of man 
was made out of material previouslv created. Xearlv everv 
nation has a tradition that its first inhabitants sprang from the 
soil. The Greeks called themselves autochthones, from the be¬ 
lief that they were born of the soil of the land they inhabited. 
In Genesis, second chapter, which is an amplification of the 
first, we learn that man is a compound being, consisting of 
body and spirit (Gen. ii. 7). From analysis we learn that the 
body is composed of sixteen material elements, eight of which 
are metallic, and eight non-metallic. The metallic are alumi¬ 
num, calcium, copper, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodi- 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN BIOLOGY. 


225 


urn aim iron; and the non-metallic are carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, 

hydrogen, chlorine, phosphorus, sulphur and silicium. Traces 

of a few others have lately been discovered. This was the most 

«/ 

perfect machinery ever made. It was not, however, until God 
breathed into it the breath of lives that man became a living 
soul. The Hebrew word for life, in Gen. ii. 7, is hayyiym, 
from the word to live; and it is in the plural number, which 
shows that it should be translated “lives” instead of “life. v 
This takes a prop from the edifice of materialism. The body 
is the house in which the mind dwells. When the house wears 
out, or is destroyed, the inhabitants must necessarily leave it. 
Any injury to the house will, for a time, affect the dweller. It 
is not difficult to understand why a vigorous mind requires for 
its home a strong body. The mind intimately sympathizes with 
every change in the bodv. The condition of the stomach and 
action of the heart affect the attention, comprehension and mem¬ 
ory. A change in the structure and functions of the brain in- 
duces insanity, which, indeed, is a. very helpless and deplorable 
condition. 

From the wonderful influence of the body upon the mind, 
the following arguments have been deduced in favor of mate¬ 
rialism : 

1. That we know the mind only as connected with a ma- 

(/ 

ferial organism. The activities and phenomena of the mind 
are exerted through the body, and we only know the mind as 
connected with a material structure. 

2. The powers and capacities of the mind are developed 
along with those of the body. As the lower orders of the bodv 
are first developed, so the lower powers of the mind are first 
unfolded. 

3. Our knowledge chronologically comes from sensation; 
so the mind is dependent upon the body for much of its knowl¬ 
edge and many of its enjoyments. 

4. Our first acquired ideas all have reference to sensible 
objects. From these facts the materialist concludes that the 
mind is only a culmination of material existences. To the 


226 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


above we must add the following facts, and 1 think that we can 
then reach a safe conclusion: 

(1) The phenomena of the mind are in kind unlike the 
phenomena of the body. Extension and impenetrability 
are the essential properties of matter, while thought, feeling 
and volition are the essential attributes and characteristics of 
the mind. 

(2) While our knowledge is chronologically developed bv 
sensation, there are primary principles which logically exist in 
the mind previous to this development. The maxim, “Nihil 
in intettsctu quod non prius in sensu ’’ is not strictly correct. 
There are some things in the intellect not in sensation; for 
there are ideas and emotions derived from man’s moral 
nature. 

(3) The mind is self-active. Tim brain is its organ, and 
through this instrument it communicates itself to the world. 
Every mental action uses up some brain tissue, and there has 
to be a nerve supply. While the brain is the organ of the mind, 
the brain is material, and matter can not move itself. The 
mind must therefore be impelled to action by its own energy. 

(4) The mind distinguishes itself from the brain. There 
were some ancient philosophers who claimed that the world 
created God instead of having been created bv him. Analogous 
to this is the doctrine of modern materialism, which teaches 
that the brain is not the instrument of the mind, but a machine 
which produces the mind. The most eminent of Greek phi¬ 
losophers clearly distinguished the mind from the organ through 
which it acts: and we.bv self-consciousness can certainlv do 
the same. The artist is conscious that he forms in his mind 
a picture before he places it on canvas. There is a great dis¬ 
tinction between a musician and the instrument upon which he 
plays. While this is true, it is also necessary that the instru¬ 
ment also be in good condition. Not even a Beethoven could 
play well upon a poor organ ; nor can the mind act well when 
it has a poor brain upon which to play. God intends both body 
and spirit to be preserved blameless. 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN BIOLOGY. 


227 


WILL ALL LIFE EKD IN DEATH 1 

I think not, and will present one argument in this connec¬ 
tion to prove the contrary. It is deduced from the instructive 
anticipation of a future state implanted in the very nature of 
man. He is not satisfied with his present enjoyments, but is 
looking forward to something better. There is nothng in this 
world that will fullv satisfy him. 

Hope’s aspirations never die, 

Its richest brightness never wanes; 

So its star will yet adorn 
The glories of a cloudless sky. 

God’s attributes are all divine, 

Man is like unto his God; 

So the essence of immortal truth 
Must in him forever shine. 

God to man his life secures. 

That man his life may share; 

So man’s life must forever last, 

While God himself endures. 

A young man starts in life, and thinks that, when he earns 
ten thousand dollars he will be happy. lie accomplishes the 
object of his desire, and is no better satisfied than when he com¬ 
menced. Ho amount of money in this world will satisfy him. 
The same thing is true in acquiring knowledge, and no amount 
of erudition will satisfy the longings of the human soul. Was 
Archimedes satisfied with his great discovery ? Certainly not. 
It only stimulated him to further progress. The discoveries of 
Hewton and Franklin so stimulated the mind of man that won¬ 
derful progress has been made in scientific pursuits. The pres¬ 
ent- and the past do not satisfy the longings of the human soul, 
but man is always anticipating something better in the future. 

“Hope springs eternal in the human breast; 

Man never is, but always to be blest; 

The soul, uneasy and confined from home, 

Rests and expatiates in a life to come.” 


228 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


It is natural for man to desire a future state of existence, 
and he shrinks with horror at the thought of annihilation. In 
the study of the constitution of man we find that the Creator 
lias given him no natural desire that he has not provided some 
legitimate means for its satisfaction. Nothing has been cre¬ 
ated in vain. Man has sight, but light was created for its sat¬ 
isfaction, and the organ of sight is adapted to the light, which 
is external to it. The sense of hearing has sound for its coun¬ 
terpart, and the sound is external to it. Man was created with 
the sense of taste, and food is designed for its satisfaction. As 
God has made such wise provisions for man’s longings and de¬ 
sires, it must be that he has also made such provisions for man’s 
instinctive desire for a future state. There is no stronger de¬ 
sire in the constitution of man than his desire for a future life. 
You seldom converse with a man who has given up all hope in 
iliis life who does not anticipate a better state of things in the 
unseen world. I, of course, speak of persons who have lived 
right. 

It must be so. Plato, thou reasonest well. 

Else whence this pleasing hope, this fond desire. 

This longing after immortality? 

Or whence this secret dread and inward horror 
Of falling into naught? Why shrinks the soul 
Back on herself, and startles at destruction? 

’Tis the divinity that stirs within us; 

’Tis heaven itself that points out a hereafter, 

And intimates eternity to man. 


— Addison. 


CHAPTER II. 

The Greatest Problems in Anthropology. 

WHENCE CAME MAN ? 

In order to satisfy my own mind on the question of evolu¬ 
tion, I have given special attention for the past live years to 
the study of biology. To my own mind, there is no conflict 
between creation and evolution. I define evolution as creation 
by law. God is in nature, and works through nature in accom- 
plishing his great designs. There is unity in life as well as 
unity in nature, and lower life is made to administer to the 
wants of the higher life. There is really no greater mystery 
in the creation of the first man than there is in the creation of 
man at the present time. If the reader will give special atten¬ 
tion to the study of embryology, he will reach the same con¬ 
clusion. The first man was created by God, and men at this 
present time are the offspring of God. In biological work, I 
have found it very interesting to compare Agassiz and Darwin. 
Haeckel claims that Cuvier and Agassiz kept back biological 
science fully half a century. Professor Haeckel is greatly mis¬ 
taken ; and I verv much fear that his materialistic and atheistic 
views will interfere with biological progress much longer than 
fifty years. Even evolutionists themselves admit that Agassiz 
established the laws of successiQn of living forms, and that he 
did more than any other man to perfect the method of com¬ 
parison, by the use of which biology has made great advance¬ 
ment in recent times. This method of comparison has really 
made biology an inductive science. It is also a great benefit 
to sociology, and is called the historic method. From the above 
facts, we can clearly see that Agassiz prepared the way for Dar¬ 
win. So far as religious science is concerned, it makes no dif¬ 
ference which position is true; viz.: the theory of the substitu¬ 
tion of one species for another, or the theory of Darwin of the 
transmutation of one species with another. It required the 
power of God to bridge the chasm, whether it be accomplished 


230 


MACROCOSM US. 


by the substitutional theory of Agassiz or the transmutation 
theory of Darwin. 

The concessions of evolutionists themselves condemn the 
materialistic and atheistic theory of evolution. Mr. Darwin, 
in “The Descent of Man," says: “We have seen in the last 
chapter that man bears in his bodily structure clear traces of 
his descent from some lower form; but it may be urged 
that, as man differs so greatly in his mental power from 
all other animals, there must be some error in this conclusion. 
No doubt the difference in this respect is erroneous, even if we 
compare the mind of one of the lowest savages, who has no 
words to express any number higher than four, and who uses 
no abstract terms for the commonest objects of affections, with 
that of the most highly organized ape. The difference would, 
no doubt, still remain immense, even if one of the highest apes 
had been improved and civilized as much as a dog has in com¬ 
parison with its parent-form, the wolf or jackal. The Fuegians 
rank among the lowest barbarians, but I was continually struck 
with surprise how closely the three natives on board H. M. S. 
‘Beagle,’ who had lived some years in England, and could talk 
a little English, resembled us in disposition, and in most of 
our mental faculties.” We take the following from Professor 
Huxley, in “Evidences of Man’s Place in Nature”: “It must 
not be overlooked, however, that there is a very striking differ¬ 
ence in absolute mass and weight between that of the lowest 
human brain and that of the highest ape—a difference which 
is all the more remarkable when we recollect that a full-ffrown 

O 

gorilla is probably pretty nearly twice as heavy as a Bosjes 

man, or as many a European woman. It may be doubted 

whether a healthy human adult brain ever weighed less than 

thirty-one or two ounces, or that the heaviest gorilla brain has 

exceeded twenty-one ounces.” 

«/ 

Professor Le Conte bridges this chasm by recognizing God’s 
immanence in nature, and it is certain that the power of God 
was necessary to develop man from pre-existing material, what¬ 
ever may have been the character of that material. The fol- 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN ANTHROPOLOGY. 


231 


lowing from Professor Le Conte, in “Evolution and its Rela¬ 
tion to Religious Thought/’ is worthy of very careful attention: 
“The way of evolution toward the highest— i. e., from proto¬ 
zoan to man and from the lowest man to the ideal, the divine 
man—is a very straight and narrow way, and few there be that 
find it. In the case of organic evolution it is so straight and 
so narrow that any divergence therefrom is fatal to upward 
movement toward man. Once get off the track, and it is im¬ 
possible to get on again. Xo living form of animal is on its 
way manward, or can by any possibility develop into man. 
They are all gone out of the way. There is none going right; 
no, not one. The organic kingdom developing through all geo¬ 
logical times may be compared to a tree whose trunk is deeply 
buried in the lowest strata, whose great limbs were early 
separated in geological times, whose secondary branches 
diverged in middle geological times, and whose extreme 
twiglets, and also its graceful foliage, its beautiful flow¬ 
ers, and luscious fruits, are the fauna and flora of the 
present day. But this tree of evolution is an excurrent 
stem, continuous through the clustering branches to the 
terminal shoot—man. Once leave the stem as a branch 
and it is easy to continue growing in the direction chosen, but 
impossible to get back on the straight upward way to the high¬ 
est. In human evolution, whether individual or racial, the 
same law holds, but with a difference. If the individual >r 
race gets off the straight, narrow way toward the highest—the 
divine ideal—it is hard, very hard, to' get back on the track. 
Hard, I sav, but not impossible, because man’s conscious vol¬ 
untary effort is the chief factor in his own evolution. By virtue 
of self-activity, through reason and co-operation in the work 
of evolution, man alone of all created things is able to rectify 
an error of direction and return again to the deserted way.” 

Dr. W. B. Carpenter, in his “Mental Physiology,” deals 
the following deadly blow at materialistic and atheistic evolu¬ 
tion : “In regard to the physical universe, it might be better 
to substitute for the phrase ‘government by laws,’ ‘government, 





232 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


according to laws/ meaning thereby the direct exertion of the 
Divine Will, or operation of the First Cause in the forces of 
nature, according to certain constant uniformities which are 
simply unchangeable, because, having been originally the ex¬ 
pression of infinite Wisdom, any change would be for the 
worse.” I knew Professor Dana and heard him lecture. He 
says, in his great work on geology, “The evolution of the sys¬ 
tem of life went forward through the derivation of species 
from species, according to natural methods not clearly under¬ 
stood, and with few occasions for supernatural intervention. 
The method of evolution admitted of abrupt transitions be¬ 
tween species, but for the development of man there was re¬ 
quired the special act of a being above nature, whose supreme 
will is the source of natural law.” Jevons, the great logician, 
who is also an evolutionist, says: “The precise reason why we 
have a backbone, two hands with opposable thumbs, an erect 
stature, a complex brain, about 223 bones, and many other pe¬ 
culiarities, is only to be found in the original act of creation. 
I do not, anv less than Palev, believe that the eve of man man- 
ifests design. I believe that the eye was gradually developed; 
but the ultimate result must have been contained in the aggre¬ 
gate of causes; and these, so far as we can see, were subject 
to the arbitrary choice of the Creator.” 

While I fully believe that God's method of creating has been 
according to law, or by evolution, I ask all my readers, who 
for a moment question God’s immanence in nature, to ponder 
well the following facts: 

(1) The theorists themselves admit that the records of geo¬ 
logical history do not fully support the hypothesis that one spe¬ 
cies has been transmuted into another. The chain of physical 
continuity has been broken, and strange forms suddenly intro- 
duced without any intimation of their appearance. The ocean 
steamer is an evolution of the dugout, but the dugout could 
not be transmuted into an ocean steamer. 

(2) Instinct in the lower animal does not seem to be the 
result of cultivation, but a direct gift from God. All persons 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN ANTHROPOLOGY, 


233 


know something of this wonderful gift on the part of the busy 
bee, but it is only the working bee that is a builder and honey- 
maker. It does not inherit this instinct from its parents, for 
neither the drone nor queen bee works, and the working bee has 
no posterity. Mr. Darwin himself was never able to overcome 
this difficulty. 

(3) All vegetable or animal life requires a seed or germ 
to start the process of development. It is not conceivable that 
material substances, even when assisted by electricity, can pro¬ 
duce an egg or a seed. All vegetable and animal life, therefore, 
require a power outside of material substances to account for 
their wonderful phenomena. 

(4) If man is a development from the highest type of 
animal creation, what has become of the intermediate link be¬ 
tween man and the brute ? Science can give no account of any 
trace of such a link. It can not be found either between the 
living or the dead. The development hypothesis can not rid 
itself of the miraculous, for if such a development ever did 
exist, it required a miracle to stop it. Science can not properly 
separate itself from the supernatural. 

(5) The most helpless in infancy of all animal creation 
is man. In his struggle for existence with other animals he 
would be placed at a great disadvantage. It would have re¬ 
quired a miracle to preserve the life of the first infant in case 
ihe evolution theorv is correct. The mind of man was neees- 

tj 

sary before the body of beast could be given up; and if the 
mind of man was given at the time the body of beast was given 
up, then there was a new creation. 

(6) The evolution theory alone can not account for the in¬ 
tellectual and moral powers of man. It was the mind of New¬ 
ton that discovered some of the grandest principles of scientific 
advancement. That mind, which changed the verv face of ma- 
ferial creation, could not have been simply the product of 
material forces. The mind of Bramante, which conceived St. 
Peter’s long before the great building was erected, was itself 
causative, and not confined simply to material causation. Man 


234 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


is conscious of his own freedom and of a law of right, and can 
not simply be the result of helpless material forces. 

(7) The philosophy of history clearly teaches that civiliza¬ 
tion was learned from without, and that no really barbarous 
nation lias ever been able to initiate civilization. All tradition 
seems to point back to the fact that primeval man had a knowl¬ 
edge of a Supreme Being. It is a fact that barbarous nations 
believe that there Avas a time Avlien they Avere more highly civ- 
llized. Evolution alone can not account for these facts. As 
races, men may so degenerate as to die out, but man never re- 
verts to any type of monkey. Domestic animals may become 
wild, for the Avild state is natural to the brute. The civilized 
state is natural to man, and when lie forsakes it he dies out, if 
not redeemed by some external influence. 

There is certainly true evolution, but no theory of evolu- 
tion can be substituted for God himself. The atheistic evolu¬ 
tionist. can not banish God from this universe; for it is certain 
that Ave live, and move, and have our being in him. If the 
theory of abiogenesis or spontaneous generation Avere ever to 
be established, it would not affect Christian theology. It would 
simply be God's 'method of creating. If God could make man 
from the dust of the earth, it is certain that he could produce 
life from the dust, if he thought proper so to do>. We should 
remember that the forces of nature are simply God’s agents. 

rt is an interesting problem to know when man first made 
his appearance upon the earth. Scientists are now Avell agreed 
that all human beings have a common ancestry, and the doc¬ 
trine of the unity of the race seems to be Avell established. The 
unitA r of the race seems evident from the folloAving facts: (1) 
All tribes, from the blackest to the AA’hitest, have a general like¬ 
ness in the structure of their bodies and the Avorking of their 
minds; (2) all races are fertile with one another. The folloAv- 
ing facts make it evident that man has been on this earth a 
long time: (1) It certainly required a long time for the de¬ 
velopment of the races; (2) much time Avas also required for 
the development of the different languages; (3) the progress 
of mankind in civilization at the daAvn of history makes it evi- 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN ANTHROPOLOGY. 


235 


dent that man had been on this earth a long time. The flint 
instruments in the old drift-gravels of Europe make it evident 
that man lived when the glacial period, with its Arctic climate, 
was passing away. It is evident, even from geological hints, 
that primeval man was not created in Europe, but had come 
from the east. In proof of this, we may state the fact that 
even in the later stone age there was continuous migration from 
Asia to Europe. The movements of mankind have always been 
westward in regions west of Chaldea, and in regions east the 
movement has been in the direction of Tartary and China. I 
will discuss this question minutely in a work I am preparing 
on “The Geographical March of History and Civilization.” 

It. is thought by some that the state of primeval 'man was 
that of savage—even below that of the lowest savage of the 
present age. We read that the first man was endowed with the 
power of speech, and had ability to name the lower animals, 
lie may not have been intellectuallv eminent, but he was mor- 
ally innocent. That he did not practice savage customs is evi¬ 
dent from the following reasons: (11 Cannibalism and in¬ 
fanticide are the most common practices of savage life. It is 
evident that primeval man was not guilty of either, or we would 
not now have any race. (2) Savage races are very cruel to 
their women. Even the lower animal is not cruel to the female, 
and it is not at all probable that primeval man was cruel to 
his mate. These savage customs to which we have alluded, and 
which could not have been primeval, seem to indicate that other 
savage habits and customs have taken their origin in a tendency 
to degradation on the part of man. For example, primeval 
man practiced monogamy, and polygamy originated in a ten¬ 
dency to develop backwards. It is a creation on the part of 
man, and not in harmony with God’s law of 'marriage given 
at the beginning. 

Professor Alexander Winchell organized the first geology 
class to which I ever belonged, and I ever after that kept up 
with his work. I heard his lectures on “Geology and Genesis.” 
I have also read his work on Pre-Adamites. I am not prepared 



236 


MACROCOSMUS. 


to fully accept his theory; but if it is true, it does not contradict 
the beautiful poetic description of creation contained in the 
first two chapters of Genesis. Adam is presented by the in¬ 
spired historian as the ancestor and type of the Messiah. After 
his departure from Eden, we learn that there was great deterio¬ 
ration on the part of some of the descendants of Adam, and 
they doubtless adopted a savage life. The same thing can be 
said of some of the descendants of Noah. Will there ever be 
a type of animal superior to man ? This is certainly an inter¬ 
esting problem. I think man is the highest type, for the follow¬ 
ing reasons: (1) All geological ideas and preparations con¬ 
verge in man. Everything preceding man seems to have been 
designed for his use, and the system of nature is so arranged 
as to stimulate his thinking powers. All vertebrate develop¬ 
ment seems to have reached its consummation in man. (2) 
Man’s superiority over the brute creation seems to indicate that 
God had a special purpose in bringing him into existence—a 
purpose beyond everything else created. (3) Man’s universal 
geographical range makes it evident that God intended him 
for the consummating type of creation. All other animals are 
limited in their geographical range, but not man. He is mon¬ 
arch of this earth. His erect posture enables him to subdue the 
earth, and contemplate the heavens. 

The Christ of history is the perfect man. Organic evolution 
reached its goal in the first Adam; human evolution finds its 
consummating type in the second Adam, the Lord from heaven. 
Christ is the ideal man, and the work of evolution now is to 
bring humanity up to this ideal. In evolution, a goal is not 
only the completion of one stage, but it is also the beginning 
of a higher stage. It introduces a higher plane of life, with 
higher capacities. As man is the completion of animal evolu¬ 
tion, and also a birth into the higher plane of spiritual life, 
so Christ is the completion of human evolution, and also a birth 
into the higher plane of divine life. When we become Chris¬ 
tians, wo have a higher spiritual life implanted into our na¬ 
tures, which relates us directly to the invisible and spiritual 
universe. 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN ANTHROPOLOGY. 


237 


WHAT IS MAN ? 

Everything preceding man appears to be a prophecy of his 
appearance upon the earth. That lie has a close relationship 
to the animal below him, no one will for a moment question. 
I hat he also has elements in his nature relating* him to the 
world above him, is just as evident. He occupies that hiatus 
that would otherwise have been unoccupied between the natural 
and spiritual worlds. His nature seems to be made up of the 
grossness of the one and of the refinement of the other. 

Some philosophers, looking only at the material side of 'man, 
have defined him simply as an intelligence assisted by organs. 
In his bodily organization man is, of course, an animal, and 
he is the perfection of animal progress. The student of geology 
is necessarily convinced that man stands at the head of animal 
creation. Any true definition of man must include his relation¬ 
ship to the lower animal, but it must not stop there. While 
man is an animal, he is much more than an animal. He is an 
organized, intelligent being, endowed with the powers of ab¬ 
straction and conscience. 

Man was created in the image of God. This is not a per¬ 
sonification of some object or force of nature, but the God of the 
first chapter of Genesis. Between the attributes of Jehovah 
and those of man there is a great difference, and this makes it 
possible that man could have been formed in the image of God. 
The Creator of man, as described in the beginning of the Old 
Testament, is worthy of man’s Redeemer as found in the Hew 
Testament. The unity of the Bible is shown in the manifesta¬ 
tions of God’s love to 'man. 

Man was created in the image of God in intellect. He has 
ability to fully recognize his own personality, and know 
definitely his own identity. He commences with certainty, and 
his own nature contradicts anv theory of absolute agnosticism. 
The agnostic might be asked how he knows that he does not 
know, for when he makes an affirmation he contradicts his own 
theory. There are things that we can positively know, for God 
did not create the senses and reason to deceive us. Man can 


238 


MACROCOSM US. 


reason from cause to effect, which enables him to subdue na¬ 
ture, and advance civilization. Man is a progressive being, 
and the way in which lie utilizes all the forces of nature is per¬ 
fectly marvelous. It certainly does not yet appear what we 
shall be. Man is so constituted that he can even know things 
invisible, and, through nature and revelation, he is enabled to 
know God, whom to know aright is life eternal. Pope thus 
speaks of the wonderful powers of man: 

“See him from nature rising show to art! 

To copy instinct then was reason’s part; 

Thus, then, to man the voice of nature spake— 

So, from the creatures thy instructions take: 

Learn from the birds what food the thickets yield; 

Learn from the beast the physics of the field; 

Thy arts of building from the bee receive; 

Learn from the mole to plough, the worm to weave; 

Learn of the little nautilus to sail, 

Soread thee their oar, and catch the driving gale.” 

Man was macie in the image of God in his sensibilities. Al¬ 
most inseparably connected with intellect is feeling. Budd¬ 
hists and Pantheists mav conceive of what thev call God with- 

« f 

out feeling, but nature and revelation teach us nothing about 
such a God. The God of nature and revelation is a God of 
. feeling, and man was made in his image. Every effect must 
have an adequate cause, and the sensibilities of man can not 
be accounted for upon any other hypothesis than that the God 
who created man is a God of feeling. Man is in the image of 
God in knowledge, for in some things he is able to know as 
God knows; so in feeling he is in God’s image, for he is able 
to feel some things as God feels. God loves man, and has given 
many manifestations of this love; so we are taught to love him, 
because ho first loved us. So long as man retains capacity to 
love God, ho has not entirely lost the image in which he was 
created. 

Man was also created in the image of God in his freedom 
of will. Dr. Carpenter makes free will power in man the dis¬ 
tinguishing characteristic between him and the lower animal. 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN ANTHROPOLOGY. 


239 


Man is conscious of having a personal free will, which can act 
as a cause. In freedom and causative power man is, then, in 
the image of God. Man is, therefore, held responsible for his 


conduct. Society never attributes right or wrong to a beast, 
but man is the subject of moral obligation. Man may deny his 
freedom, but society treats him as free. Suppose that a mur¬ 
derer, who has been condemned to death, declares upon the gal¬ 
lows that his will was not free, and lie could not help it. lie 
might enlist some sympathy, but it would not be of much bene¬ 
fit to his neck. Man was made in God’s image, and is free 
because his Maker is free. As God’s vicegerent in this world, 
man himself can originate causes. He is held strictly respon¬ 
sible for the effects of the causes he originates. From wlnit 
we have written, it is evident that man was created in the image 
of God as himself a creator, and was intended to have dominion 
in this world. Shakespeare thus speaks of him: “Whata piece 
of work is man ! How noble in reason! How infinite in facul¬ 
ties! In action, how like an angel! Tn apprehension, how like 


a god!” 


Xo student of human nature can deny the fact that man is 
so constituted that he will worship. He is naturally a religious 
being, and will worship something. It is also a fact that he 
becomes assimilated to the moral character of the object wor¬ 
shiped. These facts make it quite certain that no idolatrous 
nation can extricate itself from idolatry. There is no hope for 
the elevation of savage nations except by presenting to them 
ideals from without. The view of human nature which we have 
taken makes it very certain that the progress of humanity has 
resulted from God’s revelation to man. When all races fully 
accept that religion which teaches the fatherhood of God and 
the universal brotherhood of man, then true culture will resull 
in the perfection of humanity. 


WHITHER IS MAN BOUND ? 

In this connection we will confine our argument for a higher 
destiny for man to the almost universal belief of mankind in a 
future state of existence, or the immortality of man. Com- 


240 


MACHO COS MUS. 


parative theologists are now fully agreed upon the correctness 
of this proposition. 

The doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments 
was believed in by the ancient Egyptians, Chaldeans, Babylo¬ 
nians, Greeks, Romans, and, in fact, all the nations of antiquity. 
The doctrine of Zoroaster largely prevailed in Media, Baby¬ 
lonia, Assyria and Persia, and there can be no question in ref¬ 
erence to his belief in immortality and a future state. It is 



wards and punishments was derived from Zoroaster and the 
Persians. If this were true, it would not affect the doctrine, 
for Zoroaster taught a great deal of truth. Christ did not come 
to destroy anv truth that existed before his mission, hut he 
came to give force and vitality to all truth. The writings of 
the early Greek and Roman poets show that those nations firmly 
held to the belief that the righteous would be rewarded after 
death and the wicked punished. Homer graphically describe* 
the descent of Ulysses into Hades, and Minos, in the shades 
below, distributing justice to the dead assembled around his 
tribunal, and deciding the everlasting fate of those assembled 
around his judgment-seat. The poems of Ovid and Virgil are 
in harmony with the teaching of TIomer on this subject. 

I am satisfied that writers .do not always represent correctly 
the belief of many nations on the subject of the future. Things 
familiar are used to represent the future, as this is the best 
that can be done in the imperfect language of man ; and nations 
are supposed to have materialistic conceptions of the future 
when really their ideas are more spiritual. Mohammed’s view 
was certainly materialistic: but not as much so as many are 
disposed to think. His representation of paradise is an inten¬ 
sification of the happiness of this life: and he could not. well 
have conveyed his thoughts to the Arabs in anv other wav. 

* K * u 

He believed in the spirituality of God, and must have had a 
higher conception of the future life than simply that of an 
earthly paradise. The North American Indians appear to have 
had very material ideas of the future; but they believed in the 



1 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN ANTHROPOLOGY. 


241 


Great Spirit, and in the land of spirits, and must have used 
earthly things simply as the symbols of the felicity of a future 
state. Their belief, however, in a future state establishes the 
fact that the most widely scattered tribes of mankind have for¬ 
tified their minds with a prospect of happiness commensurate 
to their desires beyond the coniines of this present world. 


E’en the poor Indian, whose untutored mind 
Sees God in clouds, or hears him in the wind; 

Whose soul proud science never taught to stray 
Far as the Solar Walk or Milky Way; 

Yet simple nature to his hope has given 
Behind the cloud-topt hills a humbler heaven; 

Some safer world in depth of woods embraced, 

Some happier island in the watery waste, 

Where slaves once more their native land behold, . 
No fiends torment, no Christian thirsts for gold; 

And thinks, admitted to yon equal sky, 

His faithful dog shall bear him company. — Pope. 


There is no belief more fully established by the universal 
consent of mankind than is the doctrine of a future state. Even 
the skeptical Mr. Buckle clung to the belief in the immortality 
of the soul. In his “History of Civilization” he claims that it 

f 

approaches nearer a certainty than does any other belief. 

Sure there is none but fears a future state; 

And when the most obdurate swear they do not, 

Their trembling hearts belie their boasting tongues. 

—Dry den. 


CHAPTER III. 

The Greatest Problems in Philosophy. 

WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY ? 


Philosophy is the highest and truest science, for it specially 
pertains to causes, effects and principles. It has for its object 
the investigation of those fundamental principles upon which 
all knowledge and all being ultimately rest. Various defini¬ 
tions have been given of this science of first principles by the 
philosophers of the past. According to Ueberweg, one of the 
most full and complete writers on the history of philosophy^ 
philosophy is the science of first principles; it is included under 
the general name “science,” but differs from the remaining 
sciences in that it is not occupied with a limited province of 
things, but with the nature and laws of whatever actually 
exists. Lord Bacon confines philosophy to that part of human 
learning which specially pertains to the reason. Sir William 
Hamilton substantially accepts the Aristotelian view of phi¬ 
losophy, that it is equivalent to a knowledge of things in their 
origin and causes. The word “philosophy,” which means a love 
of wisdom, is first found in the writings of Herodotus. It is 
attributed to Pythagoras, who selected it as a more modest title 
than sophist or wise man. The word was appropriated and 
popularized by Socrates, lie preferred it as more modest than 
the arrogant designation of the sophists. As a final definition 
of philosophy, we will sav that it is a rational system of funda¬ 
mental principles. 

EXTREME TENDENCIES. 


In the early history of the race, philosophy and religion 
were united. They did not separate until the time of Thales, 
the first Greek philosopher. With him properly commences the 
history of philosophy. As we find a dualism in race and relig¬ 
ion among the Greeks, so, also, do we find a similar dualism in 

philosophy. The Ionian philosophers had a tendency to re- 
242 


THE GREATEST riiODLEMS IN rHIEOSOPIIY. 


243 

alism, which led to materialism; while the Pythagoreans had 
the opposite tendency to idealism, which led to pantheism. 
Epicureanism and stoicism were the prevailing philosophies at 
Athens in the time of Paul, and they had a similar tendency 
to the Ionian philosophy on the one hand, and to the Pythago¬ 
rean philosophy on the other. 

As ancient philosophy had two extreme tendencies—the one 
to an extreme realism, the other to an extreme idealism, both 
leaning to infidelity—so we find in modern philosophy similar 
tendencies leading to sensationalism and rationalism. We go 
to Prance for the development of the one, and to Germany for 
the development of the other. The sensationalism philosophy 
has had a. widespread influence, and it has been destructive to 
the effects of a pure religion. It was at one time the creed of 
the greater part of philosophical Europe. Hobbs and not Locke 
was the originator of it. “ Nihil esl intellectu quod non prins 
fuerit in sensu, " was the psychology of Hobbs, and not neces¬ 
sarily the psychology of John Locke. Sensationalism led to 
materialism, which has been destructive to the principles of a 
pure religion. Materialism prepared the way for atheism, 
which is the grossest form of infidelity. The history of Ger- 
manv shows that, idealism has been as deleterious in its tendencv 
as has been its extreme realism. Pantheism has greatly injured 
both philosophy and religion, especially in Germany. 

THE GOLDEN MEAN. 

This is the only remedy for extremes. In the history of 
Greek philosophy, Socrates was the man of action, Plato the 
man of literature and Aristotle the man of science. They rep¬ 
resented the golden mean philosophy. While they were all 
philosophers, in the progress of culture, they specially represent 
the phases mentioned. Socrates went about as a preacher of 
righteousness to all; Plato handled language so artistically as 
to become a general favorite; but Aristotle came with the dis¬ 
sect i n g-knife in his hand, and addressed himself to those who 
were willing to make dissections for the sake of knowledge. He 


244 


MACROCOSMUS. 


was pre-eminently a man of science, and has left us the means 
of expressing many of our ordinary thoughts. 

Greek philosophy was a preparation for Christianity in the 
development of a scientific and universal language exactly 
adapted to the purposes of Christianity. The Platonic phi¬ 
losophy did much towards perfecting the Greek language; for 
no Greek ever wrote or spoke purer Attic than did the cele¬ 
brated Plato. The Greek tongue became to the Christian more 
than it was even to the Homan and the Jew. There has been a 
good deal of discussion about the golden mean taught by Aris¬ 
totle. It must be remembered that Aristotle’s view was thor¬ 
oughly Greek and based on the analogy of art. The object of 
the Greek was to avoid the too much and the too little, and in 
this way attain to perfection. Temperance was the mean be¬ 
tween greediness and indifference, and liberality was the mean 
between prodigality and stinginess. While the Aristotelian 
system of ethics was by no means perfect, it was an important 
preparation for that system which is perfect. Christianity 
presents the perfect ideal, which can make this world a para¬ 
dise. We have shown that the master minds of ancient phi¬ 
losophy occupied the golden mean; and the same thing can be 
said of modern philosophy. Locke, Kant, Hamilton, Lotze. 
and, in fact, all the leading lights of modern philosophy, occu¬ 
pied the golden mean between materialism and pantheism. 
These philosophies perfectly harmonize with Christianity. Por 
several years I have given a good deal of attention to the phi' 
losophy of Herbert Spencer, and I have no great difficulty in 
harmonizing his philosophy with theism and even with Chris¬ 
tianity. Recently I have read John Piske’s “Cosmic Philoso¬ 
phy,” and he insists that his master, Herbert Spencer, is in 
perfect harmony with a true religion. He severely condemns 
materialism. 

TIIE RELATION" OF PHILOSOPHY TO THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES. 

Science is classified knowledge, and it is very intimately 
related to philosophy. In fact, each of the sciences has its own 
philosophy. While science requires observation and experi- 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN PHILOSOPHY. 


245 


ment, it is more than these. Experimenters are to the scientist 
what hod-carriers are to the mason. This fact is well illustrated 
in Darwin’s “Origin of the Species and Descent of Man.” Dar¬ 
win was a philosopher as w r ell as scientist. Science requires 
something more than simply registering and classifying facts, 
it is ihe thinkers, and not simply the observers, who have given 
us a century of natural science. -Nature does not impress its 
laws upon a passive mind. The intellectual element in true 
scientific pursuit brings the scientist into sympathy with the 
philosopher, and the true scientist and profound philosopher 
will not come into conflict. When the laws of nature have been 
discovered and systematized, science has accomplished its w T ork; 
then philosophy steps in to explain what lies beyond. The 
scientist has no right to contend that all knowledge must be coo- 
fined to his province. When the scientist disparages all other 
pursuits in order simply to magnify his own, he is only a sci¬ 
entist in name. 

The post-Kantian philosophy in Germany went to a great 
extreme, and tried to ignore the scientific method. Fichte, 
Schelling and Hegel carried the speculative tendency to such 
great extremes that they regarded experiment as beneath the 
dignity of philosophers. This did great harm to philosophy as 
w 7 ell as science; for there can he no true philosophy which is 
not based upon the scientific principle. While philosophy took 
1 his extreme tendency in Germany, positivism in France and 
other countries has gone to the opposite extreme. It would 
even exclude psychology from the category of science. Prof. 
John Fiske, of Harvard, in his “Cosmic Philosophy/’ points 
out plainly the dangerous tendency of the positive phi¬ 
losophy. 

True scientists and true philosophers are avoiding these ex¬ 
tremes, and they are seeing more plainly the reciprocal rela¬ 
tionship of science and philosophy. Science can not do without 
philosophy; for those problems springing from the depths of 
science, and which can not be separated from it, are philosophi¬ 
cal. Neither can philosophy do without science, for it must he 


246 


MACROCOSMUS. 


based upon scientific facts and principles. Science prepares 
the way for philosophy. Kant went from physics and mathe¬ 
matics to ethics and metaphysics. Lotze went from medical 
studies to philosophy. Helmholtz, the great scientist, has 
adopted the principles of the Kantial philosophy, and the lead¬ 
ing scientists of England are really the followers of John 
Locke. It is safe to state that the leading scientists of the world 
now emphasize the fact that scientists at the present time are 
greatly lacking in philosophical training. Professor Ueberweg 
says that “the so-called empirical sciences would have to aban¬ 
don their scientific character if they wanted to reject all 
thoughts transcending direct experienced' The following is 
from Professor Huxley: “The reconciliation of physics and 
■metaphysics lies in the acknowledgment of faults upon both 
sides; in the confession of physics that all the phenomena of 
nature are, in their ultimate analysis, known to' us as facts of 
consciousness; in the admission of metaphysics that facts of 
consciousness are practically interpretable only by the methods 
and formulae of physics; and, finally, in the observance of both 
physical and metaphysical thinkers of Descartes’ maxim—as¬ 
sent to no proposition the matter of which is not so clear and 
distinct that it can not be doubted.” 

We have seen that the difference between science and pin- 
losophy is very largely a difference in degree. Each science 
reaches generalizations that pass over the line into philosophy. 
When, in the science of biology, Mr. Darwin discusses the 
agency of natural selection in modifying the characteristics of 
species, he passes over the line into philosophy. Every science 
in its highest aspects extends into the territory of philosophy. 
Philosophv differs from science in its greater generality and 
abstractness. 

% 

Hr. Buchner and other materialists greatly misrepresent 
modern science. Materialism and atheism have no place for 
cause distinct from phenomena. This is not the doctrine of 
modern science. Professor Tyndall has shown that material¬ 
ism does not result from discoveries in molecular physics, and 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN PHILOSOPHY. 


247 


Professor Huxley has shown that there is nothing in physiology 
to lead to materialism. Herbert Spencer has demonstrated that 
from a scientific standpoint materialism is utterly untenable. 

THE RELATION OF PHILOSOPHY TO PSYCHOLOGY. 

Psychology treats of mental activity, and it is the natural 
history of the soul. It is thus very intimately related to- phi¬ 
losophy. In England, since the days of David Hume, there 
lias been a tendency to identify philosophy and psychology. By 
reducing philosophy to psychology, Hurfie makes the mind a 
passive recorder of phenomena, where it should really be a 
lawgiver. He makes empiricism a law, when it only furnishes 
material for law. He thus fails to do justice to the mental 
factor in all experience. In his efforts to discard all innate 
ideas, he rejects the innate in all mental processes. The So- 
cratic school treated psychology as a part of physics, and mod¬ 
ern philosophers have frequently treated it as a part of meta¬ 
physics. Psychology is a natural science so far as method is 
concerned; but mind and matter should always be considered 
as occupying different provinces. The monistic tendency is to 
favor materialism, when it appears to be in the ascendancy. 
Xo thought without phosphorus, said Moleschett. This is de¬ 
ceiving. Phosphorus is one of the most important ingredients 
of brain substance, and of course the brain is the organ of the 
mind. True philosophy distinguishes the mind from the organ 
upon which it acts. The materialist simply uttered a piece of 
truism that no one denies. It is about the same as to say that 
there can be no vision without an eye. The antithesis between 
the phenomena of matter and the phenomena of mind is such 
that it can never be abolished. In the nature of things, it is 
not possible to show that a certain quantity of molecular motion 
in nerve tissue can be transformed into a definable amount of 
feeling. The wonderful progress made during the past fifty 
years in the analysis of physical and psychical phenomena has 
tended to the complete overthrow of materialism. Whatever 
may be the parallels between physical and psychological phe¬ 
nomena, when you undertake to make them meet, you find the 


248 


MACROCOSMUS. 


same difficulty that Malebrancke had with his occasional causes 
•/ 

or .Leibnitz with his pre-established harmony There is a fence 
between the two that can no more be taken down than the gulf 
between Dives and Lazarus. Herbert Spencer teaches that mat¬ 
ter can not produce mind, but matter itself may be a manifes¬ 
tation of mind. Mr. Spencer is no materialist. 

As psychology is the basis of philosophy, the mistakes of 
psychology will necessarily affect philosophy. ft is a great 
mistake to identify psychology and metaphysics. Metaphysics 
is a necessary part of philosophy, while psychology is only the 
basis. A careful study of psychology should always precede 
the study of philosophy. If the philosopher has a thorough 
knowledge of psychology, he is not in much danger of going 
into either materialism or pantheism. I am truly glad that we 
are now having a special revival in the interest of psychological 
studies. 

THE RELATION OF PHILOSOPHY TO RELIGION. 

Philosophy and religion may be compared to two circles 
which intersect; while their spirit and method are different, 
they have very largely the same object in view. Religion de¬ 
pends largely upon faith, and philosophy largely upon reason; 
so we can harmonize them by having a believing reason, or 
rational faith. When reason and faith ignore each other, there 
must be conflict. As philosophy is based upon that element in 
man’s nature we call reason, and religion upon that element 
we call faith, it is not difficult to see how unnatural would be 
a conflict. In one sense philosophy as w r ell as religion is of 
divine origin, for God made man a philosopher in giving him 
reason. 

Whatever may have been the origin of religion, it is based 
upon an essential element in man’s nature, and it is conse¬ 
quently natural. Tf it originated in the lowest fetishism, this 
would be no more against it than the fact that all knowledge 
began in a crude way, is against science and philosophy. It is 
no exaggeration to say that man will no more quit worshiping 
than he will quit eating. 


249 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN PHILOSOPHY. 

All the great religions of the world present problems to 
philosophy; and if philosophy can explain them from a natural 
standpoint, it will give new revelations to the system of nature. 
When God works through nature, it is as much God’s work as 
if he worked in some other way. It appears to my mind natu¬ 
ral that. God should work through nature, and I believe that 
the forces of nature are messengers of God. What a man’s 
philosophy is, will also be his religion. If he is a sensation¬ 
alist in philosophy, lie will be a materialist in religion. If he 
is a pantheist in religion, you will find him an extreme idealist 
in philosophy. All true reformers should reject a philosophy 
which will rob humanity of its heart, and accept the golden 
mean philosophy, which harmonizes with true religion. Lotze, 
the greatest of recent philosophers, shows plainly that there is 
harmony between a true philosophy and a pure religion. What 
has been called rationalism is 'most irrational in the fact that 
it rejects the true limits of reason and the reasonable demands 
of the heart. The golden mean philosophy is the mediator 
between science and religion. Many of the physicists of the 
present day are far from being true to the original meaning of 
science. Science originally denoted classified knowledge; but 
now there are many things called science that are mere specu¬ 
lations. Mature, when properly interpreted, always tells the 
truth; but there are afloat in the world as many incorrect theo¬ 
ries of science as there are untrue systems of religion. At the 
time of Jacobinism in France, that country was flooded with 
more than seventy geological theories, all of which were sup¬ 
posed to contradict the Mosaic cosmogony. None of these theo¬ 
ries have stood the test of time, while Genesis is read by more 
people than ever before, and its truthfulness impresses the hu¬ 
man mind more and more as civilization advances. There is 
nothing more uncertain in this world than the various theories 
based upon an effort to interpret nature. Everything is so- un¬ 
certain that the text-books in science have to be changed every 
few years. 

There can be no just conflict between the reasoning part of 
man’s nature and the religious part; nor can there be any 


250 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


conflict between God’s will impressed upon nature and revealed 
in the Bible. The man who studies nothing except the physical 
sciences is apt to become one-sided, and conclude that there is 
no truth except in his department of study. I he facts in his 
case are that lie is not religious enough to form a correct judg¬ 
ment on religious subjects. Man has in his nature a religious 
element, the development of which is just as scientific as the 
development of reason. As the Bible contains the truest and 
purest form of religion, it is better calculated to develop man’s 
religious nature than is any other booh. While we fully believe 
in the infallibility of the Bible in the purposes for which it was 
written, we are far from believing in all the theories based upon 
it. The Bible has been abused in the hands of its friends, and 
some have endeavored to make it teach on scientific subjects 
exactly the opposite to what it really teaches. Scientists have 
held the Bible responsible for false theories which some have 

tried to deduce from it. In this wav science and the Bible have 

* 

been regarded by some as the antipodes of each other. In order 
that man may properly judge of the true relationship of science 
and religion, it is not. only necessary for him to study the Bible, 
hut he must also studv God’s unwritten word. 

1/ 

The true mediator between science and religion T believe 
to be philosophy. For about three centuries the world has been 
agitated by an unnatural strife between the scientific and relig- 

o u o 

ions classes. Many battles have been fought, and much learn¬ 
ing expended, but the longer the war continues, the more hostile 
the parties become. Several positions have been developed with 
regard to the reconciliation between science and religion. 
There are extremists, who believe reconciliation impossible; an¬ 
other class, called indifferentists, care nothing about the subject; 
the skeptics are opposed to it. It now remains for the true 
golden mean philosopher to go to work in earnest in order to 
unite that which should never have been separated. 

The objector states that philosophy has also had extreme 
tendencies. The history of both ancient and modern philosophy 
verifies the truth of this statement. It appears that the philo- 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN PHILOSOPHY. 


251 


sophical tendencies in both ancient and modern times have been 
very much the same. The tendencies were either to an extreme 
realism or an extreme idealism. These tendencies, however, 
were not so much in the masters as in their disciples. There 
is no difficulty in harmonizing the Socratic, the Platonic and 
the Aristotelian philosophies with Christianity. We find the 
truth in the golden mean between extremes, and the masters 
have usually avoided the extremes. The golden mean philos¬ 
ophy is true eclecticism in that it accepts the truth contained 
in all systems, and as rapidly as possible unifies it. We should 
avoid both die extremes of nescience and omniscience, and studv 
with the true philosophic spirit both God’s written and unwrit¬ 
ten word, and find the true harmony which exists between them. 

PROBLEMS IN PHILOSOPHY PROPER. 

Metaphysics .—Metaphysics is well named, for its contents 
properiy lie beyond physics. It is a department of study into 
which all thoughtful minds will to a more or less extent enter. 
This interesting study investigates the ultimate nature of re¬ 
ality. Ueberweg says it is “the science of principles in general, 
so far as it is common to all being.” Professor Lotze says: 
“Metaphysics is the science of the real, not of the merely think¬ 
able.” Reality is the means by which we distinguish an exist¬ 
ing object from the non-existing. It is not merely that which 
is thought, but exists whether we think it or not. If we think 
at all, we must come to metaphysical problems. Tn the study 
of the infinite, of the soul, and of the cosmos, the philosophic 
student will always find plenty of unsolved problems. He will 
always find the study interesting and profitable, if he will pur¬ 
sue it in the spirit of the golden mean philosophy. 

1. Is there intelligent reality in the Pinal Cause of the vis¬ 
ible universe? The necessities of thought-force us to the con¬ 
clusion that all things depend upon one Supreme Being who 
alone is self-existent. When we apply the word “substance” to 
this Being, we always mean the infinite agent, one and indivis¬ 
ible. Consequently we can not view the finite as part of the 
infinite, but as a product of the infinite. The infinite is not a 


252 MACROCOSMUS. 

I 

passive substance, but the basal cause of the universe. From its 
effects, it is evident that the infinite lias knowledge of itself 
and of its activities, and governs itself accordingly. Logic 
forces us to conclude that our fellow-beings have minds, because 
they act as if they had. By the same logic we are forced to con¬ 
clude that the infinite has mind, because it acts as if it had. 
The system of nature certainly shows as much order and pur¬ 
pose as do the actions of men. We are forced, therefore, to 
conclude that there is mind in the infinite, if we affirm that 
there is mind in man. 

2. Is there reality in the human soul ? When the intellect 
rises above the impressions of sense, it deals purely with men¬ 
tal products. Our senses teach us external reality, and self-con¬ 
sciousness teaches us internal realitv. There is as much evidence 
of the reality of the soul as there is of the reality of matter. 
The 'most recent results of physiology, as well as psychology, 
recognize mind as sui generis; and our intellectual operations 
require this as much as physical processes require us to postu¬ 
late 'matter. Dr. Carpenter, in his “Mental Physiology,” 
teaches that there are influential nerve arcs as well as automatic 
arcs. These imply that while there is automatism in man there 
is also free agency. Physiology and psychology unite in this 
decision. Ferrier, in his “Functions of the Brain,” locates in¬ 
tellect in the frontal lobes. Tie claims that if one lobe be 
removed, all mental operations may still he carried on, notwith¬ 
standing the fact that one-half of the body is paralyzed. I 
think we may safely conclude that microscopical investigation 
shows that the soul is an agent external to the nervous mechan¬ 
ism which it sets in motion. We, therefore, without hesitation 
affirm that the soul is a identity, distinct from other objects, and 
moving in a world of its own. Metaphysics as plainly estab¬ 
lishes the reality of mind as physics establishes the reality of 
matter ? 

(3) Is the invisible universe realf Philosophers have 
drawn a distinction between phenomena, or reality as it appears 
to the senses, and noumena, or reality as it appears to thought. 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN PHILOSOPHY. 253 

Phenomena are the basis of our knowledge of non men a, and 
noumena are inferred from phenomena. It has been claimed 
by some philosophers that noumena are unknowable, but this is 
about the same thing as to say that we do not know what we 
think. I think Herbert Spencer uses the term in the sense of 
comprehend, and in this sense it is largely true. There are 
many things we know that we do not fully comprehend. Sir 
Isaac Newton claimed that space and time are attributes of 
God. If this be true, God exists, for space and time of necessity 
exist. Space and time will always of necessity exist. The 
events that measure time in this world will pass away, and in 
that sense time will be no more; but we can not conceive of 
the non-existence of space and time. The visible universe im¬ 
plies the invisible, whence it came. The conservation of energy 
and persistence of force point plainly to the reality of the invis¬ 
ible universe. 

Noetics .—Noetics is a search for the true theory of knowl- 

«/ 

edge. Skepticism pronounces all knowledge mere opinion. It 
is strange that some agnostics can go far enough to even claim 
to know that all knowledge is mere opinion. The same extreme 
tendencies that existed among the Greeks are also quite common 
among modern philosophers. This is quite evident from the 
writings of Hume and Comte. This skeptical tendency is not 
confined to philosophy and theology, but extends also to science. 
The Italian philosopher, Farrari, who died in 1877, denied 
even the possibility of science. He uses the following lan- 
PTiasre: “Logic and nature are contradictory in themselves and 
between themselves, and thought, which would dominate facts 
by applying itself to their real elements, is of necessity in¬ 
volved in error. 1 ’ 

> 

In the discussion of this question it is necessary to come to 
an agreement as to what knowledge is in itself. Some seem to 
think that knowledge coextends with the contents of conscious¬ 
ness. This is not true; for emotions, volitions, opinions and 
beliefs are not knowledge. Knowledge is objective, universal, 
and depends upon inherent necessity. When discovered by one 



254 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


mind, it can be imparted to others. Knowledge is power; even 
the mind is helpless in view of it, and there is no freedom ex¬ 
cept in submission to it. Knowledge is an apprehension of 
the truth. Truth is something real, and exists even when we 
do not know it. When we are fortunate enough to perceive it, 
we possess knowledge. Faith must be based upon knowledge 
in order to be reliable, and knowledge largely depends upon 
faith. If we can onlv know that which is absolutely demon- 
strated, then we can not know anything. Something that needs 
no demonstration must be regarded as certain. If everything 
has ro be demonstrated, then there is nothing upon which dem¬ 
onstration itself could rest. The denial of self-evident truth 
is destructive to all knowledge. Even the demonstrations of 
mathematics depend upon self-evident truths. The origin of 
knowledge has been much discussed bv philosophers, and there 
have been extreme tendencies. The truth is found in the golden 
mean. The question of innate ideas has been much discussed 
since the days of Descartes. A failure to define terms has 
largely made this discussion fruitless. Locke clearly proved 
that these ideas are not born with us, but only appear in con¬ 
sciousness after experience. Of course, no sensible philosopher 
would claim that the mind at birth has ready-made ideas lying 
around in consciousness. Leibnitz clearly saw the mistakes of 

«y 

the past, and made it plain that while the mind had no notions 
at birth, it certainly had certain aptitudes, which, with proper 
development, gave necessary truth. Even Locke himself would 
not have seriously objected to this position. Kant rejected in¬ 
nate ideas in the literal sense as much as did Locke, but taught 
that there are certain innate conditions of knowledge, which 
are the mind’s contributions to percepts and concepts. He in* 
sisted that while all knowledge begins with experience, all is 
not the product of experience. So we see that the golden mean 
philosophy harmonizes the positions of the great masters. Even 
extiemes sometimes correct each other. For example, sensa¬ 
tionalism affirms for the outer sense, what intuitionalism affirms 
for the inner. If we credit the testimony of the one, we must 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN PHILOSOPHY. 


255 

also credit the testimony of the other. These extremes thus 
correct each other, and the truth is found in the golden mean. 

The intellect should aim at truth in its greatest perfection. 
Thus intellectual progress depends upon the amount of thought 
put into the results of observation and experiment. A proper 
use of the eyes and ears is essential to the perfection of knowl¬ 
edge as well as the exercise of the brain. While the region of 
pure thinking is certainly difficult, when thought is the result 
of Avise training, it is itself the corrective of wrong thinking. 
Take, for example, the word “substance,” which has led to 
much false philosophy. If it had been carefully defined, such 
need not have been the case. The same thing can be said of 
the words “cause,” “spirit,” “matter,” “consciousness” and 
“person.” Clearness in the use of Avords and terms is very 
essential to the progress of philosophy. 

Aesthetics .—God has placed in man’s nature a faculty by 
which he can perceive and feel beauty in both nature and art. 
The very image of God in creation is comprehended in the sense 
of beauty. The adjective “beautiful” may be used to designate 
the quality in an object that excites in man the emotion of 
beauty; the emotion may be designated bv beauty, and the beau¬ 
tiful may be used to represent the intellectual antecedent of the 
emotion of beauty. We must be careful, and avoid all extremes 
in the discussion of this subject. As in philosophy, so in art, 
there have been the extremes representing rival schools. The 
truth is in the golden mean. Idealism leads to mysticism, and 
realism to sensualism. Both extremes have always been 
deadly foes to art. When art has been most successful, the 

•J * 

golden mean has been adopted. 

Some eminent aesthetic philosophers have taken the position 
that art’s only mission is to please. I can not agree with these 
gentlemen, but must insist that the mission of both nature and 
art is to minister to life. Art should represent life. Nature 
is the expression of the very life of God, and all legitimate art 
is the expression of that which is godlike in man and his life. 
Man is the offspring of God, and that Avhich is purest and best 



25G 


MACROCOSMUS. 


in man is most like God. Xature is alone the work of God, and 
that which is best in art is most true to nature. For example, 
God expresses an idea in a beautiful landscape; man’s sense 
of beauty is excited by it, and he paints a picture. While in¬ 
sisting that art should harmonize with nature, I do not mean 
that it should be a servile imitator. It can make combinations 
that will greatly heighten beauty in a natural object; but it 
should never contradict nature, and its combinations should be 
found somewhere in the world of matter or the world of mind. 

Mature, which is the work of the great Artist, is designed 
to minister unto life. The sun, the moon and the stars, the 
blue expanse above our heads, the ocean, are all without mean¬ 
ing except as they relate to life. The inorganic feeds the ani¬ 
mal ; the animal feeds man, and the animal life of man is 
designed to minister to the higher life of the spirit. There is 
life everywhere—from the animalcule to the highest angel in 
the heavens. God, through nature, ministers to life. Beautv 
in nature is not for beauty’s sake, but it is for the good of man. 

As nature, the work of the great Artist, ministers to life, 

so all true art is not an end in itself, but is designed to minister 

to the life of man. A work of art which ignores life’s mission 

is either without value, or a thing of mischief. An artist should 

always consider, before painting a picture, what there is in him 

that can be expressed on canvas so as to minister to the life of 

others. The immortality of Grecian art resulted from its min- 

•/ 

istering to the highest life of its age. 

A young artist once asked Michael Angelo if his work would 
live. This great sculptor replied, “The light of the public 
square will test its value,” thus confessing his own ^incompetence 
to fully decide its fate. The greatest works have not alwavs 
been appreciated by those who lived at the time of their produc¬ 
tion ; but their high mission was reserved for those who lived 
in a more advanced age. 

Ethics .—As aesthetics deals with the beautiful, so ethic3 
deals with the good. It considers man as a free moral agent 
in his relationship to God. The nature of conscience and es- 



THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN PHILOSOPHY. 


257 


sence of right also belong to ethics. It consequently has to do 
with the most interesting and important problems of life. 

.From the days of Socrates to the present time, philosophers 
have been searching for the standard of right. All the ethical 
schools are usually comprehended under two schools; viz.: the 
intuitional and the utilitarian. There is much truth in both 
schools, and also extreme tendencies. The golden mean philos¬ 
ophy is essential in solving ethical as well as all other problems. 

The intuitional school finds the standard of moral conduct 
inherent in man, and not learned from experience. If we un¬ 
derstand by this that the capacity for morality is innate, the 
position is correct, and it places ethics upon the same basis as 
noetics and aesthetics. Some intuitionalists have gone to an 
extreme, and maintained that moral ideas are innate. This, of 
course, subjects intuition to the same objection as the doctrine 
in general of innate ideas. The doctrine that there is a basis 
for morality in the very constitution of man does not exclude 
proper utility. Intuition and utility may be compared to two 
circles, which have much in common. All candid ethical writers 
must admit something innate; also that experience must develop 
ideas, and that the useful is very essential. To my mind, intu- 
ition refers to the source, and utility to the end. The .word 

i/ 

“utility” is rather an unfortunate word in this connection, as 
the useful is means towards an end. Its use, however, is now 
so general that we can not well discard it. The theory of utility 
has been carried to a great extreme, and some writers seem to 
use it in the sense of external, and produce a system of exter- 
nalism. The faculty or power of the mind by which we per¬ 
ceive and feel the right and wrong in the intention and choice 
can receive no explanation from any system of mere external- 
ism. Even those who plead for the greatest good to the great¬ 
est number would not apply it personally. They apply it to 
society, but society has to be purified and elevated by indi¬ 
viduals. Utility certainly has an important place in ethics, but 
it is far from being everything. Society can not do without 
conscience, much less can the individual. We may not always 

7 */ d 


258 


MACBOCOSMUS. 


be able to tell what the right is, but this does not interfere with 
the absoluteness of conscience. Conscience deals with the 
motives, and we know when we intend the right. We can 
consider what ought to be without any reference to our emo¬ 
tional nature. Feeling, however, is apt to enter in when it 
comes to personal application. The fact that I can choose the 
right, without reference to feeling, is itself proof that I choose 
for the sake of the right and not for the pleasure produced. 
Pleasure may be a concomitant of the choice, but I choose for 
the sake of the right. Man is, consequently, a free moral agent 
like unto his God. 


CHAPTER IV. 


The Greatest Problems in Sociology. 


WHAT IS SOCIOLOGY ( 


Hie word “sociology literally means a discourse about 
society. It is one of the most recent, and, at the same time, the 
most important, of the sciences. While in all ages much has 
been written in reference to the welfare of society, sociology 
really took its origin with Auguste Comte. Comte’s “Positive 
Philosophy” contains the germs of the modern science of so¬ 
ciology. Herbert Spencer, who has been one of Comte’s sever¬ 
est critics, thus writes: “We must not overlook the greatness of 
the step made by M. Comte. His mode of contemplating facts 
was truly philosophical. Containing, along with special views 
not to be admitted, many thoughts that are true, as well as 
large and suggestive, the introductory chapters to his ‘Sociology’ 
show a breadth and depth of conception beyond any previously 
reached. Apart from the tenabilitv of his sociological doctrines, 
his way of conceiving social phenomena was much superior to 
all previous ways; and among others of its superiorities was its 
recognition of the dependence of sociology on biology.” We 
take the following from Lester F. Ward’s “Dynamic Soci¬ 
ology” : “So far as M. Comte’s views on social statics are con¬ 


cerned, they must be classed as generally unsound; but with 
him this is nothing new. He seems to possess the rare power, 
everywhere manifest throughout his works, of weaving upon 
a warp of truth a woof of error. The iron consistency of his 
general logic is in strange contrast with the flimsy fallacies 
that fill out its framework, and stare at the astonished reader 
at every page. He is a great general in the army of thinkers ; 
but when he descends, as he continually does, to meddle with 
the brigades, regiments and platoons, he throws them into con¬ 
fusion by the undue severity and amazing stupidity of his 
commands.” 

25!) 


« 


2G0 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


The great industrial changes, which have taken place since 
the Trench Revolution, have called special attention to social 
conditions, and have tended to develop the science of sociology. 
Among the many writers on the subject, Herbert Spencer has 
doubtless attracted the most attention, and he has probably done 
more to develop the science than has any other writer. While 
Mr. Spencer makes sociology depend too much upon biology, 
and his sociology in many respects appears to end where soci¬ 
ology should properly begin, I have found his works more sug¬ 
gestive on the subject than the productions of any other author. 
Mr. Spencer has certainly shown that sociology is very closely 
related to biology. We speak of the “body politic,” which, 
though a metaphor, clearly has a biological origin. Growth is 
a very important word in both biology and sociology. As we 
ascend in the scale of life, the organs of the material body be¬ 
come more heterogeneous and their functions more difficult to 
understand; they present more difficult problems to the biolo¬ 
gist. The same thing is true of the body politic. Analogy, 
however, should not be pressed too far. Some have argued that 
as the material body matures, grows old and dies, the same 
thing can be said of the body politic. There is here a great 
difference. The organs of the human body give way, and there 
are none to take their place. The same thing can not be said of 
the body politic. Individuals die, but even better prepared in¬ 
dividuals are ready to take their place. 

Heredity is an important word in both biology and soci¬ 
ology. It is a two-edged sword cutting both ways. It can be 
used for the good of the individual and the good of society; but 
when it runs in the wrong direction, it is very dangerous to 
belli. Any arrangement in society which retards the multiple 
cation of the best and facilitates the multiplication of the worst, 
is extremely dangerous. I believe in helping the dependent 
classes; but any help which enables the vicious to propagate 
their kind is very unfortunate. There is a class in society which 
should not marry and bring up offspring. Just how to prevent 
this is one of the most difficult problems in sociology. 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN SOCIOLOGY. 


261 


Adaptation is an important term for the biologist and soci¬ 
ologist. Every species of organism is always adapting itself 
to its conditions of existence. The negro-, the Hindoo and the 
Enegian can live in climates fatal to Europeans. It is sur¬ 
prising, however, the extent to which Europeans can gradually 
become adapted to all climates. Adaptation teaches the im¬ 
portance of maintaining the best social conditions, so that men 
may in time become fitted to fulfill these conditions spontane¬ 
ously. In case society, by relaxation of proper social condi¬ 
tions, permits retrogression, then reformation is necessary, and 
the process of adaptation has to be gone over again. 

THE RELATION OF SOCIOLOGY TO PSYCHOLOGY. 

The sociologist should have a thorough knowledge of psy¬ 
chology. A true theory of mind is essential to a true theory 
of conduct, and all rational legislation must be based upon a 
true theory of conduct. While we have a great system of edu¬ 
cation, it is not sufficiently based upon a true theory of mind. 
Most persons think that knowledge is sufficient to keep the in¬ 
dividual from crime, which is certainly not the case. It is not 
knowledge that is the moving agent in conduct, but the feeling 
that is excited by it. The drunkard knows the fearful conse¬ 
quences of his conduct, vet he is not deterred by the conscious¬ 
ness of the fact. In order to stop him from drinking, there 
must be excited in him sufficient feeling to antagonize his desire 
for drink. 

The education of the intellect alone will not prevent crime. 
In fact, some of the greatest criminals have been well-educated 
persons. Statistics well establish the fact that a very large 
number of persons who have committed murder by poison were 
well educated. When we examine carefully the course of study 
from the common school to the completion of a university 
education, we do not find much in it to influence character. It 
may the better prepare the criminal for his ruinous work upon 
society. I fully believe in training the intellect, but education 
should be so shaped as to influence the character. 


262 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


It is not, then, so much intellectual training as moral train¬ 
ing, that is essential to the diminution of crime and the im¬ 
provement of conduct. It is quite universally admitted that 
the Bible influences moral conduct as does no other book. Pro¬ 
fessor Huxley claims that it forms a moral substratum to edu¬ 
cation that no other book forms. From the psychological fact 
above discussed, we may safely conclude that there is no other 
book so important to the sociologist as is the Bible. 

While sociology is the newest, it is certainly the most com¬ 
prehensive and important of the sciences. We define sociology 
as the scientific classification of all social phenomena. 

THE EVOLUTION OF SOCIETY. 

Historical sociology does not sustain the golden age of the 
past sung by Ovid, Virgil and Horace. Whatever may be true 
in reference to the garden of Eden, it is very evident that, after 
Adam’s fall, his descendants deteriorated rapidly, and the con¬ 
dition of the race soon became very low. In fact, this seems to 
lie clearly the teaching of Genesis as well as that of science. 
Evolution teaches deterioration, but this is an exception to the 
general law of progress. So we soon find the movement of 
h u m a n i tv u pwa rd. 

Even among the lower animals, we find anticipations, of 
man as a social being. Nearly all animals are social. Among 
the different species of mammals, you find but few individuals 
that lead isolated lives. The pioneers of the West found broad 
roads through the wilderness worn bv the movements of multi- 
hides of bison. Where salt could be found, their trails were 
like beaten roads round a city. When the Russians took pos¬ 
session of Siberia, it was so densely peopled by gregarious ani¬ 
mals that it required hunters two hundred years to subdue it. 
The animal is naturally social. 

t/ 

The savage man no more than the civilized man will nat¬ 
urally live in isolation. The savage tribes of Australia, the 
numerous tribes of Africa, the inhabitants of Greenland and 
Iceland, afford sufficient evidence that man is a social being, 
and does not normally live in isolation. V T here the circum- 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN SOCIOLOGY. 


263 


stances of civilization require even partial isolation, even this 
tends to give way to aggregation. In the development of the 
United States the isolation of families appeared a necessity, 
but even this is giving way to new conditions. It is estimated 
that fully one-third of the population of this country now live 
in cities, and in the Eastern States about one-half. 

In the evolution of society, we find the family one of the 
first of institutions. In fact, we find it anticipated in the 
lower animal. Below the birds, there is not much social com¬ 
position found. Nearly all birds, however, live in families; 
the males help build the nests, provide food, and protect the 
offspring. One great writer declares that genuine marriage can 
only be found among birds. The whale is true to his mate, 
and continues to live with her through life. The orangutan, 
the gorilla and the chimpanzee have the family instinct quite 
well developed. 

Social anthropology plainly teaches that the lowest savages 
live in families. In some cases, marriage is only temporary. 
Among the Mincopis, the father lives with the mother until 
the child is weaned, and' then seeks another wife. Among all 
savage tribes, we find that divorce and remarriage are verv 
frequent. In some parts of the world, polyandry is practiced, 
and one woman is married to several brothers. In some parts 
of southern India, however, a woman’s husbands are not related 
to one another. Polygamy, in which one man has several wives, 
is much more common than polyandry. It is not confined to 
savage tribes, but exists to this day in Turkey and China, and 
continued in one of the Territories of the United States until 
rendered unlawful by the authority of the nation. The only 
form of marriage that is now sanctioned among Christian na¬ 
tions is monogamy. It is what Christ teaches that God in- 
tended from the beginning. 

The social aggregate above the family, we term genetic, 
because of a real or fictitious, relationship. Mr. Freeman 
claims that the village communitv of the Arvan world is an 

O v d 

inheritance from prehistoric antiquity. The Teutonic form of 


264 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


the primitive village community is known as the Mark; that 
is, a defined boundary-line. All belonging to this community 
are supposed to be related to one another through descent from 
a common ancestor. In this respect, we find that the mark 
community agrees with the gens or clans. So it is evident that 
the earliest form of political union in the world was blood rela¬ 
tionship, and not territorial continuity. 

The tribe includes village communities, and it usually 
claims large territory. The North American Indians had 
extensive hunting-grounds; but they lived in small villages, 
usually placed at the 'mouth of a creek, or on the shore of a 
lake. The tribe has a head chief, who is usually judge in most 
serious matters. In some cases, the tribe is composed of several 
clans, and the clans are so independent that they are mistaken 
for separate tribes. 

In the evolution of societv, the social mind, under the influ- 
ence of external circumstances, forced tribes to form a federa¬ 
tion, which resulted in national consciousness. The historic 
words of Thucydides have always been sad ones to me. When 
I think of the downfall of Athens, which city produced such 
a high civilization, it makes me feel sad. It is evident, how¬ 
ever, that the Greek idea of a free city was such that national 
consciousness on the part of the Athenial Confederation could 
not be so developed as to form a permanent nation. It was 
different with Teutonic civilization. It passed directly from 
Ihe tribal stage to that of national organization, before cities 
could occupy the foremost position. Besides, when Teutonic 
nations were forming, the cities of the Homan Empire had all 
learned to recognize a master in the person of the emperor. 
When we fully understand the difference between Graeco-Roman 
civilization and that of the Teutonic race, we are better able 
to appreciate the stability of our social and political system. 

Language has had much to do with the evolution of society. 
The lower animal has intellect, memory and will; but language 
appears to be ihe Rubicon he has never crossed. The dog barks 
as he did at the beginning, and the cock crows as he did in the 


265 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN 


SOCIOLOGY. 


days oi Simon Peter; but language is the social glory of man. 
^ e do not see how society could have well developed without 
it. Whatever may have been the origin of language it was cer¬ 
tainly one of God s best gifts to man; and it proves, even more 
than the upright form, that man was made in the image of 
God. 

THE INEQUALITIES OF SOCIETY. 


The following language is from Professor Huxley: “Even 
the best of modern civilization appears to me to exhibit a 
condition of mankind which neither embodies any worthy ideal 
nor even possesses the merit of stability. I do not hesitate to 
express the opinion that if there is no hope of a large improve¬ 
ment of the condition of the greater part of the human family; 
if it is true that the increase of knowledge, the winning of a 
greater domain over nature which is its consequence, and the 
wealth which follows upon that domain, are to make no differ¬ 
ence in the extent and the intensity of want, with its concom¬ 
itant physical and moral degradation, amongst the masses of 
the people, I should hail the advent of some kindly comet which 
would sweep the whole affair away, as a desirable cosumma¬ 
tion.” We must face the fact that although society is much in 
advance of what it was centuries ago, it is still in great agony 
because of manifold inequalities. Even in America, the land 
of the free and home of the brave, a dangerous plutocracy is 
rapidly developing. If this tendency can not in some way be 
checked, it will not be another century before Dives will find 
himself in Hades. Mr. Froude gives a very cheerless picture 
of the Old World. He claims that a million of persons own 
the soil of Great Britain; that the House of Lords possesses 
more than one-third of its area, and that the great estates are 
continually devouring the small estates adjoining them. Three 
dukes own more than one hundred thousand acres each. In this 
connection, I wish to suggest a few remedies for the inequalities 
of society. 

1. The individual should be made to feel that he must sup¬ 
port himself and those dependent upon him. It is certain that 


206 


MAC ROCOSMU S. 


the working class wastes fully half of their earnings in this 
country. 

2. Our educational system should be made more practical. 
Mr. Henry Georoe savs that to educate men who must be con- 
damned to poverty is to make them restive. Education is a 
failure unless it teaches men how to make a living. 

3. We should abolish the liquor traffic, which is a prolific 
cause of pauperism. 

4. There should be a limit to the amount of property that ' 
any man can bequeath to his children. When the children have 
a start, the rest should go to the state, unless it is by will given 
to benevolent institutions. Society has rights as well as chil¬ 
dren. 

5. Corporations should be so guarded by society that they 
can not enrich the few at the expense of the many. 

6. There should be a graduated income tax, so that the bur¬ 
dens of government would fall upon the rich, who are most 
protected. 

7. There should be a maximum of wealth. I do not be¬ 
lieve that an individual can honestly acquire enough of this 
world’s goods to injure society; but a maximum of wealth 
would reach the dishonest. 

8. The state or countv should guide the energies of those 
who can not make a living. Some are as deficient in this 
respect as are the blind, or deaf and dumb. The state should 
have co-operation farms and other industries by which the 
energies of those who can not make a living, can be guided. 
Of course, when one is so .trained that he can make a living, 
he should have the privilege of doing so. Civilization should 
banish pauperism by looking after him who can not take care 
of himself. Societv mav be able to so guide his energies that 
he will become useful. 

SOLUTION OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS. 

The influence of woman in the solution of social problems 
is itself an important problem. No one can question the fact 
that woman is naturally a social reformer. Societv must have 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS Ix\ r SOCIOLOGY. 


267 


the best of reasons for limiting the natural abilities of woman 
in reference to the wider activity to which she is so well suited. 
As a matter of fact, society has no reason for limiting her 
activities except such as grow out of blind sentiments. Many 
of the customs which interfere with the expansion of woman’s 
capacities extend hack to the days of barbarism. Under the 
influence of such customs, Lord Bvron savs: “I regard them 
[women] as very pretty but inferior creatures, who are as little 
in their places at our tables as they would be in our council 
chambers.’’ This sentiment prows out of the morals of Bvron, 
and wherever you find similar morals, you will find a similar 
sentiment. 

All persons will admit the moral and social influence of 
woman in the family and the church. The family is one of the 
oldest and most sacred of institutions; but it is largely the 
moral and social influence of woman that holds the familv 

t 

together. The same thing can be said in reference to the 
church. The best workers in all departments of church activ¬ 
ity are the women. Of course, there are some positions in the 
church to which men are better suited; but the moral and 

social influence of woman is essential to the success of every 

«/ 

department of church work. In the selection of pastor and 
other officers of the church, the women vote the same as the 
men. The state is a divine institution as well as the church, 
and it has a special mission to society. There is certainly no 
pood reason why women should vote in church matters and not 
also in state 'matters. When women vote for all officers of the 
state, from President down, there will be a great change in the 
moral character of those who hold official positions in the state. 
The vote of woman is very essential to good government in this 
country. 

The problems of pauperism and intemperance are among 
our most difficult social problems. They are very closely related. 
Pauperism must be distinguished from poverty. Poverty may 
be the means of causing persons to struggle to a higher life, but 
pauperism always degrades. The poor v T e will always have 


268 


MACJROCOSMU S. 


with us; but pauperism must be banished; or our civilization 
is in danger. Mr. Booth speaks of the submerged tenth in 
London, and in all our great cities fully one-tenth of the inhab¬ 
itants are paupers. The environment of the pauper is such 
that there is no hope of his rising. Something must be done 
for him. I suggest the following remedies for pauperism: 

!. There should be compulsory education, and all the chil¬ 
dren of the pauper class should be required to attend school. 
Education should be made more practical, and all the children 
should be taught how to make a living. 

2. The energies of paupers should in some way be directed 
by the state, and their environment should be changed. Large 
state or county farms should be provided, and the state should 
superintend the work of paupers until they can be so trained 
as to make a living for themselves. Pauperism should not be 
continued far into the twentieth centurv. 

t 

3. The abolition of the liquor traffic would go a long ways 
toward solving the pauper problem. The whisky problem is 
itself one of our most difficult problems. All will admit the 
evil of the traffic; but it is so mixed up with politics that it 
is difficult to bring it before the nation upon its own merits. 
If this could be done, I believe the American people would at 
once abolish this ruinous traffic. I am fullv convinced that the 

t/ 

vote of woman is essential to the destruction of this malignant 
parasite upon the body politic. 

r Fhe labor problem is one that demands solution. We cer¬ 
tainly, in this age, need a more equitable distribution of the 
products of industry. That the condition of the laboring classes 
is now better than at any other period in the history of the 
world, no one can well question ; but it is equally certain that 
it ought to be much better than it is. Whatever mistakes labor 
organizations may have made, thev are very essential to the 
elevation of the laboring classes. It is difficult to tell to what 
extent capitalists would have gone, had it not been for the 
existence of these organizations. Like centrifugal force, they 
have prevented everything from going to the center. Capital 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN SOCIOLOGY. 


269 


will ultimately be forced to compromise with them, and give 
labor its rights. In fact, there is already a tendency to co-oper¬ 
ation and profit-sharing. 1 am also convinced that a reaction 
has already set in against the accumulation of great fortunes 
into the hands of the few. Society is willing; for men to have 
what they can earn honestly, but it will drive pirates from 
commerce as it has driven them from the sea. I hope the time 
will soon come when we will have a comptroller of commerce as 
Avell as a comptroller of currency, and that the watering of stock 
by great corporations will be strictly prohibited. If this had 
been the case, millions of dollars could not have been stolen 
from the Erie corporation and the Union Pacific Railroad. We 
greatly need a comptroller of commerce connected with our 
Interstate Commission. 

Another problem which now confronts society is the method 
by which gambling can be abolished in the great centers of stock 
and produce exchange. The law looks after the man who garh- 
bles in a gambling-house, though the bad results are compara¬ 
tively small, and mostly to himself; but the law does not appear 
to reach him in case he gambles in an exchange, where the 
results are widespread. This is very much like saying, if a 
man purchases poison for himself, he shall be punished, but if 
he places it in a water-supply, where hundreds will suffer, he 
shall go free. These large speculative sales are ruinous to the 
conditions of safe and. prosperous trade. The commercial force 
of large cities is tooi frequently on the side of wrong-doers. The 
general welfare of the country requires the prohibition of gam¬ 
bling in high places. Social reformers should continue the agi¬ 
tation until they secure a law, and enforce it, against these gam¬ 
blers and pirates in the business world, which are greatly inter¬ 
fering with the progress of society and civilization. If some 
of these public gamblers of New York, Chicago, and other great 
cities, were in the penitentiary, it would be a great blessing to 
the country. 


270 


MACROCOSMUS. 


WILL THERE BE A SOCIAL MILLENNIUM % 

While I oppose every form of materialistic and atheistic 
evolution, I as fully believe in a true evolution as I believe in 
the laws of gravitation. Both science and the Bible point to the 
future for the golden age of civilization. Sociology as well as 
revelation teaches that there will be a millennium. The organ¬ 
ized forces which will ultimately brijig about this golden age 
in the history of humanity are the following: 

1. The Family. In the history of this divine institution, 
wo find constant progress, although among some civilized na¬ 
tions there have been fearful tendencies to deterioration. We 
sometimes become discouraged on account of the number of 
divorces in this country; but never in the historv of the world 
has the family had so great an influence in promoting genuine 
progress as at the present time. The Christian family will do 
much towards bringing about a social millennium. 

u O 

2. The Church. The church is certainlv the greatest ethi- 
cal force in advancing a true civilization. Mr. Kidd, in his 
excellent work on ‘‘Social Evolution,” claims that Christianity 
is the principal cause of the progress of western civilization. 
It is quite certain that religion has been the great ethical factor 
in all social progress. The history of the Chinese, Persians and 
other Oriental nations, as well as the historv of the Greeks and 
Romans, fully establishes this fact. Mr. Leckv and other 
rationalistic writers claim that there is no substitute for relig- 
ion in advancing the moral progress of the race. Mr. Leckv 
thus speaks of the Roman religion, which so profoundly influ¬ 
enced Roman civilization: “It gave a kind of official consecra¬ 
tion to certain virtues, and commemorated special instances in 
which they had been displayed; its local character strengthened 
patriotic feeling; its worship of the dead strengthened a. vague 
belief in the immortality of the soul; it sustained the suprem¬ 
acy of the father of the family, surrounded marriage with 
many imposing ceremonies, and created simple and reverent 
characters profoundly submissive to an overruling Providence 
and scrupulously observant of sacred rites.” 


THE GREATEST PROBLEMS IN SOCIOLOGY. 


271 


When Christianity was introduced into the Roman Empire, 
its moral fopce had great social significance. Its enthusiasm 
differed from anything that had ever been witnessed upon the 
earth. At the introduction of Christianity, infanticide was 
almost universal; but the moral force of Christianity abolished 
it. So late as the period of Napoleon the First, the idea of 
universal empire was considered a legitimate national aspira¬ 
tion. The ethical force of Christianity has rendered such an 
ideal quite foreign to our civilization. Even skeptical writers 
admit that the moral force of Christianity has abolished slavery. 
The spiritual enthusiasm of Christianity will finally bring 
about a social millennium. 

3. The Nation. The Christian nation will develop the 
highest civilization. The Reformation has done, much towards 
developing, the Christian nation. Professor Marshall, in his 
“Principles of Economics,” lays great stress upon the change 
which the Reformation wrought upon the English character. 
He says that “its doctrines deepened the character of the people, 
reacted upon their habits of life, and gave a tone to> their 
industry. He also claims that the family relations of those 
who have adopted the reformed religion are the richest and 
fullest of earthly feeling; there never has been before any mate¬ 
rial of tecxture at once so strong and so fine with which to build 
up a noble fabric of social life.” More and more, as time 
moves on, will the Christian, nations come to the front as the 
mightiest factors in the world’s onward progress. 

God is the ruler of the nations; he has determined the times 
before appointed and the bounds of their habitations. The 
nation which ignores God soon passes from the field of action, 
and is only known upon the pages of history. God designs the 
nation, as well as the family and the church, to bring about the 
perfection of humanity. The nation has its own special place 
and vocation in the evolution of society. As there is a divine 
order in the calling and founding of the family, there is also 
a divine order in the calling and founding of the nation. It has 
its foundation in the will of God, and its mission is one of right- 


272 


MACROCOSMUS. 


eousness. The Christian nation is, therefore, one of God's spe¬ 
cial agents in bringing about a social millemnium. The center 
of history is the personal Christ, and this is the center toward 
which the nations move. The Christ of history will, then, ulti¬ 
mately bring about the millennium of science and the millen¬ 
nium of revelation. 


PART II. 


The Greatest 


Problems in Theology. 


CHAPTER I. 

The Philosophy of Religion. 

WIIAT IS RELIGION ? 

In all discussion, we should give careful attention to defini¬ 
tion. Many unfortunate controversies could have been avoided 
if both parties had clearly defined their terms. It is important 
at the beginning of this chapter to know exactly what religion 
is. Cicero derives the word religio from re-legere, to consider, 
in contrast with nec-ligere, to neglect. Lactantius and others 
derive it from re-ligare, to rebind. The philosopher Kant iden¬ 
tified religion and morality, and he claims that when we look 
upon all our moral duties as divine commands, we are religious. 
This definition is too narrow; for while religion includes moral¬ 
ity, it includes more. No definition of religion can be correct 
which leaves out the element of worship. 

Fichte, the immediate successor of the great Kant, takes 
exactly the opposite view to that of his master, on the question 
of religion. He separates morality and religion, and makes 
religion almost identical with knowledge. He says that relig¬ 
ion gives to a man a clear insight into himself, answers the 
highest questions, and thus imparts to us a complete harmony 
with ourselves, and a thorough sanctification to our minds. 
While there is much truth in this definition, like that of Kant, 
it is only partial. True religion includes the morality claimed 
by Kant and the knowledge claimed by Fichte, but it means 
more. 

Schleiermacher makes religion dependence, and Hegel 
makes it freedom. According to the first, religion consists in 
our consciousness of absolute dependence on something which, 
though it determines us, we can not determine in turn. While 
this definition contains truth, it is not sufficiently comprehen- 

273 


274 


MACROCOSM US. 


sive, and Hegel reduces it to an absurdity by stating that if 
consciousness of dependence constituted religion, the dog would 
be the most religious of beings. According to Hegel, religion 
ought to be perfect freedom; for it is neither more nor less 
than the Divine Spirit becoming conscious of himself through 
the finite spirit. 

Comte in France and Feuerbach in Germany make man both 
the subject and object of religion. They do not think that man 
can know anything higher than himself, and that humanity 
should be the true object of worship. History teaches us that 
when humanity has been the object of worship, there has been 
a fearful tendency to worship the lowest elements of human 
nature. We readily perceive that religion is very difficult to 
define, and we have almost as many definitions as we have relig¬ 
ions in the world. While it is scarcely possible to give a defi¬ 
nition of religion which would be descriptive of all the relig¬ 
ions of the world, we can so define it as to distinguish the 
object of religious consciousness from other objects of con¬ 
sciousness, and also distinguish our consciousness as applied to 
religious objects from our consciousness as applied to other 
objects. This does not mean that we have a separate conscious¬ 
ness for religion, but that consciousness varies as it is applied 
to different objects, I define religion as that element in man’s 
nature which enables him to apprehend and reverence the Infi¬ 
nite. I know this definition is not complete, but it is the best 
we can do. Tteverence, of course, leads to external worship; 
but as Max Muller has taught us, there are religions which have 
no external worship. While there are exceptions, such do cer¬ 
tain lv exist, 

RELIGION IS NATURAL TO MAN. 

When the time comes that man in this world neither eats 
nor drinks, then the time may come that he will be without 
religion. We would consider the question as to the origin of 
hunger and thirst as an idle one; vet hunger and thirst had 
an origin. Tt would hardly be possible to separate the origin 
of hunger and thirst from organic life. We might imagine the 


THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 


existence of creatures not needing food or drink, but this is so 
contrary to what we know of nature that we reject it as prac¬ 
tically impossible. 

In the discussion of the origin of religion, some have sup¬ 
posed that there is no God, and that in time man was able to 
invent one. Ibis makes the stream rise higher than its source, 
and is consequently an impossibility. Others have thought 
that while God really exists, man was developed without any 
sense of his existence, and that the acquisition of this sense was 
the work of time. It is evident that no new sense has been de¬ 
veloped in man since his creation, and that at the beginning 
he had the same religious element in his nature that he has at 
the present time. 

While it is evident that man at the beginning did not have 
that high conception of God that Christians have at the present 
time, still he believed in higher beings than himself. The es¬ 
sence of God, which, is light, love and spirit, was revealed to us 
through the mission of the Son of God. While monotheism, in 
a sense, was the primitive form of religion, still man’s idea of 
God was a very different thing from what it is at the present 
time. In the childhood of the race, man’s ideas must of neces¬ 
sity have been childish. As the child looks up to its father, 
man would naturally have looked up to a higher being. 

It is evident that there is something in the nature of man 
which causes him to worship a superior being. It is not im¬ 
portant in this connection to know whether this results from 
instinct, reason or tradition; the fact remains that man is a 
being who will worship. In all ages and among all races man 
has worshiped something which he supposed to he endowed with 
attributes of a superior being. 

MAN BECOMES LIKE THE MORAL CHARACTER OF THE OBJECT 

WORSHIPED. 

Man looks upon the character of the object he worships as 
possessing perfection. He condemns in himself everything un¬ 
like this character, and approves everything like it. He, of 
course, abandons everything in himself not like his god, and 


276 


MACROCOSMUS. 


approves of everything in his life like unto the object he wor¬ 
ships. Of course, his character and conduct will depend upon 
the character of his deity. If the moral character of the deity 
is defective, then the moral character of the worshiper will of 
necessity be defective. 

The worshiper will do everything in his power to gain the 
favor of his deity. If the deity is a god of war, then the wor¬ 
shiper will be warlike. All opposed to this deity will be hated 
with an intense hatred. If the object of worship happens to 
be the goddess of impurity, then the worshipers will try to gain 
the favor of the goddess by living impure lives. Among the 
Mohammedans and Mormons many became polygamists who 
would have preferred a life of monogamy. They went against 
the highest inclinations of their natures because they thought 
their religion required it. 

The moral character of the object worshiped, becomes the 
moral character of the worshiper. History fully illustrates this 
fact. The supreme deity of the Assyrians was warlike, and 
they were a very warlike and cruel people. The ancient Egyp¬ 
tians were animal worshipers, and bestiality, the loavest vice of 
human nature, was common among them. The city of Corinth, 
the eye of Greece, was given to the worship of Venus, and 
the most sacred persons of that city were prostitutes, conse¬ 
crated to the worship of the goddess. The Northmen, who 
finally overran the Roman Empire, were worshipers of Odin 
and Thor. The gods were bloodthirsty and cruel, and the wor¬ 
shipers were of like nature. Their greatest delight was in 
scenes of blood and slaughter. Tt was thought that one of their 
hero-gods, after having destroyed many others, destroyed him¬ 
self ; hence it became disreputable to die a natural death, so 
many, who escaped in battle, committed suicide, believing that 
this would be the means of introducing them into the halls of 
Valhalla. 

It is scarcely possible for an idolatrous nation, by means 
within itself, to extricate itself from idolatry. The purest 
forms of idolatry are found in its earlv history. Prof. Max 
Muller has shown that Fetishism is comparatively recent in 


THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 277 

the history of idolatry, and that the word originated with 
Portuguese sailors. The worship of the sun, moon and stars 
was doubtless one of the earliest forms of idolatry, and it ap¬ 
pears to have been quite universal in the early history of the 
race. All idolatrous nations point back to the time when their 
worship was purer than at present. They seem to realize that 
they have departed from a purer faith embraced by their 
fathers. Paul explains that when they knew God, they did 
not glorify him as God, but became vain in their imaginations 
and their foolish hearts were darkened. 

The history of idolatrv furnishes abundant evidence that 
development took a wrong direction. Many of the customs of 
savage nations reduce the people to the most revolting slavery. 
We frequently find these superstitious practices connected with 
tribes having a favorable environment. The country of Daho¬ 
mey is rich in products, and affords every facility for a high 
civilized life. Yet we find fearful customs which demand the 
almost daily sacrifice of human life. The imagination of the 
people is so corrupted that they think the only way to satisfy 
a malignant Being more powerful than themselves is by the 
free sacrifice of human victims. The constant tendency is 
downward. 

The animal worship of Egypt has been an interesting sub¬ 
ject for investigation on the part of Egyptologists. It is strange 
that so highly civilized a people would worship animals. Care¬ 
ful attention to the origin of this worship will show that it was 
not so impure at the beginning. When we seek the visible 
presence of the Creator in his works, we find it most imminent 
in the wonderful instincts of lower animals. Egyptian idol¬ 
atrv is a good illustration of the tendency in human nature to 
develop in the wrong direction. 

Comtism itself is only animal worship in a higher form. 
His abstract conception of humanity is only an intellectual Fe¬ 
tish. M. Comte himself declared that he worshiped the crea¬ 
ture man as the consummation of all other creatures. This is 
certainly animal worship in a purer form. As man is higher 


278 


t 


MACROCOSMUS. 


than the animal, (Jointism may be much higher than other forms 
of animal worship. As man sometimes goes even below the 
brute, the worship of humanity may become the lowest form 
of idolatry. Comte appears to have been a very high-minded 
man, and would, of course, worship the highest and purest in 
men and women. Alexander, who was a very impure man, 
was worshiped, and Napoleon Buonaparte, who was not at all 
angelic in his make-up, has been, on account of his marvelous 
success, the idol of many. During the French Revolution, the 
worship of humanity was symbolized by a woman, but by no 
means one of the purest of women. The worship of Venus 
among the ancients was the worship of woman, but it was the 
worship of the vilest of women. It is evident that Comtism 
may become a very degrading form of idolatry. 

Tt is evident that in religion itself evolution is liable to 
work in the direction of degradation. Mohammedanism, the 
last of the historic religions, is of great interest in this connec¬ 
tion. The tendency to corruption commenced even in the life 
of the founder of this religion. Mohammed was his own most 
corrupt disciple. Before he became a conqueror, his life was 
pure, but ambition ruined this great life. Instead of testing 
the spirits as did Paul, he claimed revelation for some of the 
most degrading vices to which humanity can be subjected. The 
result was that he established a political hierarchy which is in 
the wav of an advancing civilization. 

There appears to be no way of redeeming man from idolatry 
except by presenting to him a purer faith from without. An 
object of worship must be presented which is the opposite in 
moral character to those which he has been worshiping. His 
affections must be purified by the contemplation of a holy being. 
God came to man in the mission of his Son. The Christ, of 
history is morally perfect, and is exactly suited for the religious 
leadership of humanity. The gospel should be preached to 
every human being. 


THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 


279 


THE RELIGION OF SCIENCE. 

The moral attributes of God are the foundation of the relig- 



with a divine revelation. The religion of science presents to 
us the attributes of God, but revelation gives us tbe very essence 
of the Supreme Being. God is love, God is light, God is spirit, 
are matters of revelation. In the mission of the Christ, the 
very essence of Jehovah is brought to man. Please consider 
carefully the following facts: 

I irst—The system of nature as well as divine revelation 
points to the Supreme Being. Paul says: “Because that which 
may be known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested 
it unto them. For the invisible things of him since the crea- 
tion of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the 
things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; 
that they may be without excuse” (Pom. i. 19, 20). This 
makes it evident, that man, through his perceptive powers, can 
get some knowledge of the infinite. Prof. Max Muller claims 
that man perceives the infinite as readily as he does the finite, 
and that there can be no finite without the infinite. Man’s per¬ 
ception extends beyond the finite to the infinite. When man 
looks upon the ocean, just where his eyesight breaks down, the 
unlimited or infinite begins. It is not unscientific to state that 
man lives in the very presence of the infinite. With every 
perception of the finite, we have a presentiment of the infinite. 
We have in this living germ the root, of the whole historic de¬ 
velopment of religion. 

We instinctively depend upon the Supreme Being. There 
can not be a second without a first; so there can not. be a depend¬ 
ent being without an independent one. Man is a dependent 
being, therefore God is an independent being. While we may 
not fully comprehend God, we do instinctively depend upon 
ihe infinite. Our moral nature also demands personality on 
the part of the infinite. 

Sir Isaac Xewton claims that space and time are attributes 
of God. If this be true, then God exists, for space and time 


280 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


of necessity exist. While we do not have a direct intuition 
of God, we do have an intuition of space and time, and if they 
are attributes of God, as the greatest scientist of modern times 
says, then God of necessity exists, for space and time do of 
necessity exist. John Stuart Mill advised all who would prove 
the divine existence, to adhere to the argument from design. 
Matthew Arnold says, “We are woven by a power not our own,” 
and Professor Tyndall asserts that we are woven by something 
not ourselves. Logic forces us to the conclusion that the some¬ 
thing mentioned by these great writers is the God of this uni¬ 
verse. As we are the product of a power not our own, there 
is thought in the universe not our own. There can be no thought 
without a thinker. There is, therefore, a thinker in this uni¬ 
verse not ourselves. A thinker is a person. Therefore, we have in 
the universe a personal thinker not ourselves. John Stuart Mill 
would put it thus: “Every change must have an adequate cause; 
my coming into existence as mind, free will and conscience was 
a change; therefore, that change required a cause adequate to 
account for the existence of mind, free will and conscience.” 
The union of mind, free will and conscience in the cause is 
sufficient to prove the personality of the cause. The fact of 
the existence of moral law as an effect is sufficient to prove the 
personality of the cause. The fact of the existence of moral 
law as an effect is sufficient to prove the existence of a moral 
lawgiver as the cause. Man as an effect is a moral personality; 
therefore, the cause of man’s existence is a moral personality. 
Involution must always equal evolution. 

Second—God is in the moral nature of man. Thomas Car¬ 
lyle says: “The moral sense, thank God, is a thing you never 
will account for; that, if you could think of it, is the perennial 
miracle of man; in all times visibly connecting poor, transitory 
man here on this bewildered earth with his Maker, who is eter¬ 
nal in the heavens.” Dante says of Beatrice, as he saw her 
in the “Paradise”: 

“She smiled so joyously. 

That God seemed in her countenance to rejoice.” 


THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 


281 


God is thus seen at times in the human countenance. This 
is the result of the activity of the higher nature, where con¬ 
science is supreme. It is, therefore, evident that the most im¬ 
portant culture a man can have is such as will enable him to 
have this light. 

I hose who have studied the pictures of Charlotte Corday 
and Jean Paul Marat will be able to study this subject by con¬ 
trast. Carlyle says: “O ye hapless two, mutually extinctive, 
the beautiful and the squalid: sleep ye well in the mother’s 
bosom that bore you both.*” 

God was in the Christ, reconciling the world unto himself. 
The light from heaven was clearly visible in the countenance 
of Jesus when he was on the Mount of Transfiguration. On 
this mount the light in the countenance of the Son of man had 
its supreme manifestation. Jehovah himself was well pleased, 
and exhorted mankind to hear the mandates of the Son of God. 
The first Christian martyr had a face like that of an angel. 
God was in this faithful 'man. Man’s moral nature brings him 
into close contact with the God of the universe. It is said that 
when Moses came down from the mountain, his face did shine. 

Third—Hature as well as revelation teaches the great lesson 
of obedience to God. The philosopher Locke says: “The idea 
of a Supreme Being, infinite in power, goodness and wisdom, 
whose workmanship we are, and upon whom we depend, and 
the idea of ourselves,' understanding, rational beings, being 
such as are clear in us, would, I suppose, if duly considered and 
pursued, afford such foundations of our duty and rules of action 
as might place morality among the sciences capable of demon¬ 
stration, wherein, I doubt not, but from self-evident proposi¬ 
tions, by necessary consequences as incontrovertible as those 
of mathematics, the 'measure of right and wrong might be made 
out./’ 

Victor Hugo, in his great work, “Les Miserables,” show’s 
that God in the moral nature of man must be obeyed. Jean 
Valjean finally confessed, and Hugo says in reference to the 
court and audience, there was a great light shining before them. 



282 


MACROCOSMUS. 


Richter, in his “Titan,” teaches the same lesson, when lie rep¬ 
resents the leper with a pistol in his hand, saying: “I can not 
repent.” Shakespeare teaches the fearful consequences of dis¬ 
obeying God’s moral law. FalstalT had been an early compan¬ 
ion of Henry V., but as soon as Henry became king, he rejected 
the wicked old man. All the misleaders of the king were ban¬ 
ished ten miles from his presence. It is well for all to keep 
moral lepers at a distance. Scott, in “Guy Mannering,” teaches 
the same great lesson taught by the authors mentioned. Glossin 
had been an accomplice in the great crimes of kidnaping a 
child and murdering its associate. Years after, when he came 
near the spot, he used the following language: “Good God! 
And is all I have gained worth the agony of that moment, and 
the Thousand anxious fears and horrors which have since em¬ 
bittered my life! Oh, how I wish that- I lay where that 
wretched man lies, and that he stood here in life and health. 
But these regrets are all too late.” 

Man’s greatest mistake in life is to disobev God’s laws in 

O %J 

either nature or revelation. 

Yet still there whispers the small voice within, 

Heard through God’s silence and o’er glory’s din; 

Whatever creed be taught, or land be trod, 

Man’s conscience is the oracle of God. — Byron. 


CHAPTER II. 

Genesis and Geology. 


I have frequently heard it said by both scientists and relig¬ 
ionists that the Bible was not given to teach men science. In 
the main, this statement is true, but it can be carried to ex¬ 
tremes. If science is classified knowledge, we have, in the be¬ 
ginning of the Bible, a scientific statement of the origin of 
things. A e find there the fundamental element from which 
all things have sprung. There are statements in the first of 
Genesis that progressive science of three thousand years is now 
making plain. The Hebrew word for God is Elohe, but in the 
Bible it is Elohim that created the heavens and the earth. The 
plural form there used was entirely correct, for it denoted 
three persons in one nature; but this could not be understood 
until the mission of the Christ and Holy Spirit into this world. 
When Moses speaks of the creation of light, he uses the word 
aor, which is the word in the Hebrew language for electricity. 
Thus was modern science anticipated. That the Bible is favor¬ 
able to the progress of science is evident from the fact that 
you find practically no science where the Bible has not gone. 

THE MOSAIC RECORD. 

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 
Ho words that have ever been penned by man are more sublime 
than this language in the first chapter of the Bible. It con¬ 
demns atheism, for it was God who created the heavens and 
the earth. It condemns pantheism, for the heavens and earth 
are not God, but v r ere created by him. It condemns material¬ 
ism, for material substances came from a substance not mate¬ 
rial. The things that are seen were not made of things that do 
appear. The Word v r as in the beginning, and by him God 
created all things. 

Tn Genesis we have two words for create, which are very 

similar in meaning, bahrah and ahsah. The first, however, 

28 


t 


284 


MACROCOSMUS. 


appears to denote primary creation, in contrast with the 
second, which denotes the arranging of secondary mate¬ 
rial. We find the material of the earth at first in a 
chaotic state; then darkness was upon the face of the 
deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the 
waters. Matter can not move itself, and it required the 
Spirit of God to move it. How long the chaotic period conti n- 
ued we are unable to say. The first chapter of Genesis appears 
to be divided into two periods of three days each, both of the 
periods commencing with light. The first period represents 
the inorganic, and the second, the organic world. The light 
of the first was cosmical; that of the second was to direct 
days and seasons on the earth. Each period ends in a; day 
of two great works. On the third day God divided the land 
from the water: then he created vegetation, which was a 
work very different. On the sixth day Jehovah created 
quadrupeds; then he created man, which was the greatest 
work of all. 

The word “dav” was used in three senses in the Bible. 

tj 

First, it denotes the light part of the period called day, in con¬ 
trast with the dark part. Second, it denotes both the light 
and dark parts of the day. The evening and morning were 
the first day. Third, it denotes an indefinite period of time. 
The entire period of creation is called a day, and we read of the 
dav of the Son of man. This use of the word “dav” was rec- 

t 1/ 

ognized by some of the Christian Fathers long before the devel¬ 
opment of geological science. It does appear to me that any 
candid student of Genesis and geology will not fail to see that 
it required inspiration on the part of Moses to have given, when 
he wrote, such a faithful outline of geological science. While 
the Bible was not given for the special purpose of teaching sci¬ 
ence, it certainly does, when properly understood, harmonize 
with true science. 

The first two chapters of Genesis are the most marvelous 
literature in the world. They comprehend almost everything 
essential to the very highest literature. 


GENESIS AND GEOLOGY. 


285 


1. We find in them a historical basis. They commence 
with the first man, Adam, and the first woman, Eve, and antici¬ 
pate profane history by quite a long period. 

2. They are poetic in their construction. We find in them 
parallelism in both matter and form. The six days are fur¬ 
nished with a corresponding and closing formulae. The whole 
is divided into halves of three days each, and each day of the 
first half is parallel with the corresponding day of the. second 
half. This beautiful epic of creation is not so much the narra¬ 
tion of incidents in their order of succession as it is a logical 
classification of divine work, in which God asserts himself in 
each successive period. 

8. These chapters contain an inspired vision of creation. 
There is no good reason why a prophet should not look back¬ 
wards as well as forwards. Daniel had a vision of the kinsy 
doms of this world, and John had visions concerning things that 
should shortly come to pass. There is no reason why Moses, 
who was himself a prophet, or the prophet to whom the Lord 
first revealed the wonderful document used bv Moses, should not 
have had in vision a complete description of the creation of the 
heavens and the earth. 

4. It is doubtless true that we also have in these chapters 
a metaphorical element. Adam was a type of Christ, and Eve 
a type of the church. In Matt. xvi. 18 Christ says: “Upon this 
rock I will build my church.” It is evident that “rock” here is 
a metaphor. In Gen. ii. 22 God took a rib and builded a 
woman. The verb is the same, and if the antitype, “rock,” 
upon which the church was built, was a metaphor, it looks 
quite probable that the rib upon which God builded a woman 
was also a metaphor. Be that as it may, we are all certainly 
grateful that God created woman, if we do not know exactly 
how she was made. I fully believe that God had power to 
make a woman out of a literal rib, but it does not appear to my 
mind as the most probable interpretation. 

5. In the first two chapters of Genesis we have also a typi¬ 
cal element, and from this we can show quite conclusively that 


280 


MACROCOSM US. 


they contain a revelation from God. Typology is very conclu¬ 
sive evidence to my mind of a divine revelation. No one could 
make a shoe to tit the foot if he did not understand the construc¬ 
tion of the foot; no one could make the type to exactly fit the 
antitype if he did not fully understand the antitype. The one 
who made the first Adam knew exactly his relationship to the 
second Adam. 

if the ^Mosaic cosmogony is true, it was certainly given by 
inspiration; and that it is true, I will next proceed to show is 
the verdict of science. 

THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD. 

Nebular Hypothesis. “And the earth was without form, 
and void ; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.’’ Lionel 
Beale says: “It is certain that matter is somehow directed, 
controlled and arranged ; while no material forces or proper¬ 
ties are known to be capable of discharging such functions.” 

John Stuart Mill savs: “The laws of nature do not account for 

«/ 

their own origin.” 

I’he Bible does not say how old this universe is. Astron¬ 
omy and geology sav millions of years. Sir W. Thomson claims 
that the sun has been burning at least one hundred millions 
of years. Genesis certainly gives plenty of time to the physi¬ 
cists, for it goes back to the beginning. Both science and the 
Bible teach that while the universe possesses great antiquity, 
it had a beginning. One of the greatest of scientific works 
uses the following language: “We have thus reached the be¬ 
ginning as well as the end of the visible universe, and have 
come to the conclusion that it began in time, and will in time 
come to an end.” 

The Book of Genesis evidently gave the fundamental idea 
of what is now called the nebular hypothesis. This hypothesis 
has been called “the grandest generalization of the human 
mind.” If it should be so modified as to become accepted phi¬ 
losophy, pointing out the methods of the Creator, rather than 
the blind force of the infidel, it will, doubtless, continue worthy 
of this high distinction. The skeptic tries to pervert every 


GENESIS AND GEOLOGY. 


287 


generalization of science to liis own purposes. Even Laplace 
said to Napoleon: “I have no need of the hypothesis of a God.” 

It should be remembered that the nebular hypothesis does 
not go back to the beginning, but it takes matter from an un¬ 
seen power behind outward phenomena, and marks its progres¬ 
sive development. It is evident to any Christian philosopher 
that the sun, planets and comets could only proceed from the 
counsel of an all-wise God. 

Period First—Cosmical Light. Geology teaches us that in 
the first period light was eliminated from the dark chaotic 
mass of earth. The opus operation of the first period was an 
evolution from the dark mass of our condensing planet of that 
luminous matter which supplies the light. By that very act 
light was divided from darkness. 

There is certainlv no conflict between geology and Genesis 
on the origin of light; for Genesis teaehes that God on the first 
day said: “Let there be light, and light was.” No thoughtful 
scientist will take the position that matter could have originated 
itself. This universe is the result of the creative and provi¬ 
dential energy of God. 

While philosophers can analyze light, calculate its great 
velocity, and render useful the potencies in its beams, they can 
neither make it, nor explain its production. There is yet mys- 
tery in dob’s questions, “Where is the wav where light dwell- 
etli V And, “By what way is the light parted, which scatter- 
eth the east wind upon the earth Light is of God, for “God 
is light.” Light performs its marvelous mission in purifying 
1 his world, but it becomes corrupted by nothing. It thus be¬ 
comes a fit symbol of the Son of God, whose mission was to 
save the sinful without, in any way, becoming contaminated 
with sin. We should walk in the light, and thus be light-bear¬ 
ers as Avas our Master. 

Period Second. The time came in the process of cooling 
when the cold of the upper atmosphere condensed the vapor 
of water for the first time, and clouds began to form. The 
light of the sun which had fallen upon the earth from its sep¬ 
arate existence, was gradually shut out, and the earth was en* 


MAC-ROCOSMUS. 


288 

shrouded by total darkness. .As these clouds held abundance of 
water, they poured forth copious rains, which, beating upon the 
rocky surface, produced vast amounts of sediment, which was 
spread over the bottom of the accumulated ocean. 

The Book of Genesis does not reveal how the present atmos¬ 
phere was evolved from the chaotic mass of waters. The pri¬ 
mary object of the record is not to teach science, but to reveal 
religious truth. The thing of most importance to be revealed 
was- the fact that the firmament was of God’s construction. 
This fact does not interfere with our believing that the elimina¬ 
tion of those gases which compose our atmosphere was accom¬ 
plished by the Supreme Being through natural agencies. In 
fact, the very laws of nature are the thoughts of God. 

Period Third. The continued cooling and shrinking of the 
earth developed wrinkles in the crust, and these continued io 
grow until they finally became lands rising above the level of 
the ocean. From these beginnings have grown all the conti¬ 
nents and islands of the present time. While yet the rainy 
period continued, continent-building commenced, and as soon 
as sufficient light penetrated the waters of the ocean, sea-weeds 
appeared. 

This well corresponds with the work of the third day. On 
this day the formative energy of Elohim was engaged in the 
distribution of land and water and the production of vegeta¬ 
tion. There is good reason to believe that the original distri¬ 
bution of land and water was much the same as at present. 
Physical geographers have observed that the coast lines of the 
areal continents and mountain ranges generally run from north- 
east to southwest, and that these lines are parts of great circles, 
tangent to the polar circle, and at right angles to a line drawn 
from the sun’s center to the moon’s, when these bodies are either 
in conjunction or opposition. These lines have mostly deter¬ 
mined the forms of the continents from the beginning. 

Period Fourth. At length the earth became sufficiently 
cool as not to convert the oceanic waters into steam, to be re- 
turned in perpetual rains, and so the clouds were dispersed. 
The scene was changed, and the sun shone upon the earth. 


GENESIS AND GEOLOGY. 


289 


W hen the clouds first gathered, the earth was partially self- 
luminous, cast no shadow, and consequently there was no night. 
-Now the darkened world cast its shadow behind, and, on the 
unveiling of the sun, the phenomena of day and night were, for 
the first time, possible.. Sunrise and sunset now possessed a 
new significance. 

This description certainly harmonizes with the fourth day 
of Genesis, when the sun, moon and stars were appointed as 
chronometers. They were to divide the day from the night, 
and to be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years. 
“And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to 
give light upon the earth.” Hot to introduce light upon the 
earth for the first time, but to serve as a permanent arrange¬ 
ment for the distribution of light already brought into exist¬ 
ence. 

Period Fifth. The lowest forms of animal life now make 
their appearance, and these are followed by higher and higher 
for cycles of ages. For more than half the interval, animals 
breathed only water; and when at length air-breathers appeared, 
they were still doomed to inhabit the waters. They were aqua¬ 
tic reptiles—great monsters. At the close of the period, winged 
reptiles and then real birds made their appearance. Thus a 
great change passed over the life of the globe. This period 
comprehends the Eozoic, Palaeozoic and Mesozoic time of geol¬ 
ogy- 

This is the fifth day of Genesis, and geology confirms the 
Bible record in the following ways: (1) It shows the priority 
of marine animals to birds and land animals; (2) it shows 
that, as God designed, animal life has continued in an unbroken 
succession since its first introduction. The word bam is used 
to indicate the introduction of an entirely new thing—the prin¬ 
ciple of animal life. 

Period Sixth. When the long reign of reptiles had ended, 
quadrupeds and monkeys appeared on the earth. These held 
possession until finally man appeared and assumed dominion. 
This is called the Caenozoic time in jreoioa'v. 

O Ot 




290 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


This corresponds to the sixth day of Genesis, upon which 
land animals and man were created. This, like the third day, 
is distinguished by a double creative act, the production of land 
animals and the creation of man. God created man in his own 
image, in the image of God created he him ; male and female 
created he them. The word bara is used, clearly indicating a 
new production, and it distinguishes man from the animals 
which preceded him. The image of God, doubtless, consisted 
in the following: (1) Man as an intelligent and free agent; (2) 
man as a moral and religious being, having dominion over the 
lower animals. It must also be observed that woman was also 
created by God; and 'made partaker of the divine image, and 
dominion over all. Man is rapidly acquiring dominion over the 
earth, and the time will come when he will have it entirely 
subdued. 

Period Seventh. That is the present time. We have given 
briefly the geological story, and have shown how beautifully 
it corresponds to Genesis. As Genesis was not given to teach 
geology, this correspondence becomes more interesting and can 
be adduced as additional evidence of a divine revelation in Gen¬ 
esis. I might also state that as we are living in God’s Sabbath, 
it is evident that the days in Genesis denote long periods of 
time. Our Saviour could claim that as God was working on 

O 

his Sabbath, it Avas not wrong for him to do deeds of mercy on 
the Sabbath day. 

We should distinguish God’s Sabbath from man’s Sabbath. 
I understand the Hebrew laAvgiver as using the former as the 
reason why the latter should be sanctified. The day that God 

•7 

blessed in Eden Avas the first day of human life and not the 
seventh. Tt does not correspond to the Sabbath of Exodus— 
man’s day of rest. T see no reason, howeA 7 er, Avhy man should 
not have rested on the seventh day from the beginnino* 

When aw consider the condition of the TTebreAv race at the 
dawn of civilization, the Proem of Genesis becomes still more 
Avonderful. While its special purpose Avas not to teach science, 
the folloAving facts are worthy of very careful thought: (It 


GENESIS AND GEOLOGY. 


291 


The fact that such a record should have been made; (2) the 
tact that it has placed itself under the conditions of chronolog¬ 
ical order, reaching from chaotic matter to a completed and peo¬ 
pled world; (3) from the fact that it has been approved by some 
of the greatest naturalists of the nineteenth century. A great 
naturalist not long since said to me that* it is a very remarkable 
production, and to his mind it appeared to harmonize with 
science, Dana, the greatest geologist of the past century, could 
see no conflict. 


CHAPTER III. 

The Philosophy of Christianity. 


THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE INCARNATION. 


The word “incarnation” is derived from the Latin incarno, 
which means in the flesh. In reference to the incarnation of 
Christ, Paul expresses it thus: “God manifested in the flesh.” 
The Word was in the beginning with God, and consequently not 
of the beginning. The Word was God in nature or essence, and 
with God so far as personality was concerned. Some use the 
word “subsistence” instead of “personality,” but I do- not know 
that anything is gained by this. In the Incarnation, the Word 
became the Son of God. 

1. The world was longing for the Incarnation. Back of 
the polytheism of the Aryan races as well as of the Semitic, we 
find a lingering monotheism, which shows that at the beginning 
God revealed his will to man. Paul gives the philosophy of 
polytheism in the statement that when they knew God they glo¬ 
rified him not as God, but became vain in their imagination 
and their foolish hearts were darkened. It being a fact that 
God early revealed his will to man, it is not surprising that the 
Gentile world was longing for the Incarnation. Plato, the most 
eminent of Greek philosophers, predicted the coming of a divine 
teacher. In studying the history of the Aryan races, we find 
that the early Hindoos believed in the doctrine of Incarnation. 
The Orient was impressed with the thought that, when Jesus 
was born, wise men came from the east to visit him and pay to 
him that homage due the incarnate Son of God. 

2. The Hebrew race anxiously looked forward to the Incar¬ 
nation. Every Hebrew mother was anxious that her son should 
be the coming One. In the early history of this race, you find 
many promises of the coming of the Messiah. The prophet 
Isaiah clearly predicted the fact that the Messiah would be 

born of a virgin. While the Jews believed in the Incarnation 
2<)2 1 


293 


THE PHILOSOPHY OF CHRISTIANITY. 

i 

they did not reach the high conception that the Messiah would 
be God manifested in the flesh. 

3. There were supernatural events connected with the Incar¬ 
nation. While these things were supernatural, they were not 
unnatural in the history of the Messiah. We naturally expect 
something extraordinary in the life of him who was called God 
manifested in the flesh. The prophet Simeon and the prophet¬ 
ess Anna make it very evident that God had communicated his 
will unto them. It is also verv evident that the angel Gabriel 
carried a message from God to both Mary and Elizabeth. The 
same angel likewise appeared unto the shepherds. 

4. The Incarnation introduced a new era into the world’s 
history. Study carefully the history of the race before the 
Incarnation, and its history afterwards, and you will be thor¬ 
oughly convinced that a great change has taken place. The 
ancient nations spent most of their time in war, but Christians 
make it the last resort. Rome had conquered the ancient world, 
and at the time of the Incarnation the world was comparatively 
at peace. It was the proper time for the Prince of peace to be 
born. 

5. Blessings of the Incarnation to us: (1) The Incarnation 
brought God to man. Ancient nations looked upon God as 
being too far away. Cicero and Seneca claim that in their 
day there was an effort to reach up to God instead of bringing 
God to man. The difference between Christianity and other 
religions is the fact that other religions tried to lift man up to 
God, while Christianity brought God to man. Christ was 
called Immanuel, which means “God with us.” 

(2) The Incarnation gives to the world a proper conception 
of the fatherhood of God. Confucius scarcely believed in any 
God at all; the Buddhists make God an abstraction; the God 
of the Mohammedans is an absolute tyrant; the God of Israel 
was the powerful One; but the God of the Christian is the 
Father in heaven. 

(3) The Incarnation especially emphasizes the universal 
brotherhood of all mankind. Some writers have been disposed 


294 


MACPOCOSMUS. 


to deal unjustly with, human nature. Whatever fault we may 
he disposed to find with humanity, one thing is certain, and 
that is the fact that humanity was greatly elevated hy the Incar¬ 
nation. The Son of God became also' the son of man. 

PHILOSOPHY OF THE ATONEMENT. 

1. There are a number of theories of the Atonement. When 
the world was largely at war, it is not surprising that the idea 
of ransom should enter largely into the doctrine of the Atone¬ 
ment. It is evident that it was carried to an extreme; still it 
is true that Christ gave himself a ransom for many (Matt. xx. 
28; I. Tim. ii. G). Those who denounce the idea of ransom 
in the Atonement are wrong, for it is Scriptural. There is 
also an element of truth in what is called the commercial theory, 
for we were bought with a price (I. Cor. vi. 20; vii. 23). The 
theory of substitution carries with it very important truth, for 
Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures (I. Cor. 
xv. 3). 

2. The Atonement satisfied the demands of justice. The 
majesty of law must-be sustained and the demands of justice 
met, or we would have anarchy in the state. Brutus felt this 
when lie put to death his own sons for treason to the Roman 
Republic. God certainly felt this when he banished from his 
presence the angels that kept not their first estate (Jude 6). 
This does not detract from the love of God, for the fallen angels 
would have disturbed even the peace of heaven itself. Man’s 
conduct may be such that the welfare of socictv demands his 
separation from it, and the separation may not be injurious 
even to the man himself. The Atonement satisfied the demands 
of justice; so that God could be just, and at the same time 
extend the blessings of salvation to man. ' While the idea of. 
reconciling God to man has been carried to' a great extreme, and 
has given an improper conception of the character of God, still 
it has in it some important elements of truth. 

3. While it is true that man’s personal sins could not be 
transferred to Christ, it is still very evident that he endured 
chastisement for us. Without this intervention, sin would have 


THE PHILOSOPHY OP 0HiUSTIANITY. 


295 


forever cruslied man s hope. While Lady Macbeth had learned 
to hate her crime, she was not able to wash the blood from her 
hands. A man may hate his crime one minute after commit¬ 
ting it, hut he can not of himself get rid of the stains. We 
ought to learn that when some things are done, they can not be 
undone. We may obtain pardon through the atoning blood of 
Christ; still the fact remains that the deed was committed. 
Macbeth will never be made to think that the murder should 
have been. Personal demerit is not transferable from one per¬ 
sonality to another, but one can endure chastisement for the 
sins of another. While Christ died to satisfy the demands 
of justice, he did not become a murderer or a perjurer in order 
to take away the sin of the world. 

It is said that Bronson Alcott Christianized his school by 
enduring chastisement in the place of the pupil. The boy 
struck the master once, and then burst into tears. Professor 
Anderson, of Grayson College., Texas, endured similar punish¬ 
ment in the place of a student, and the student ever felt humil¬ 
iated in the fact that he thus struck his teacher. There is 
something philosophic in the Bible view of the Atonement. 
There is something very profound on the subject of the Atone¬ 
ment found in the fifty-third chapter of the prophecy of Isaiah. 
It is not surprising that a careful study of this chapter con¬ 
verted an eminent English skeptic. 

3 The Atonement reconciles man to his God. It is such 
a powerful manifestation of God’s love that it reaches the heart 
of man. Those who remain unmoved by the love of God shown 
in the Atonement Christ made for the salvation of man, are 
certainly beyond redemption. 

The atonement in reconciling man to God may be illus¬ 
trated. Suppose all the boys, save one, of a large family, leave 
home and go to a distant country. They fin all v settle in an 
important city of that country. The city itself becomes a 
Sodom, and the boys are taken in by the city. They are rapidly 
going to ruin, and the father learns of their ruined condition. 
He finally sends his only remaining son to save his brethren. 


296 


MACROCOSM US. 


He visits them in a city of vice and pestilence, and finally dies 
of the disease himself. His brethren fully understand the fact 
that he has given his life to save them from their sins. They 
become thoroughly penitent, and return to their father’s house. 
We have such an example in the mission of the Christ to this 
world. He left his Father’s presence, and came to this world 

in order to save his brethren from their sins. God is in Christ 

% 

reconciling the world unto himself. The Atonement appeals 
to the brightest nature of man. 


THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE RESURRECTION. 


The word “resurrection” is derived from the Latin re , 
again, and surgo, to rise; and it denotes the act of rising again, 
especially after death. There are many who deny the resurrec¬ 
tion of the dead. Some are found even among professed Chris¬ 
tians. A great effort is made by some writers to explain away 
that portion of the Bible which clearly teaches that the dead 
will rise again. It is claimed that the resurrection of the spirit 
fulfills the Bible statements in reference to the resurrection. 
The spirit will never be buried in the grave so as to rise again. 
At death, the spirit immediately goes to God, who gave it. The 
general resurrection has reference to the bodv and not to the 

O %j 


spirit. 

1. The resurrection of Christ gives us assurance that the 
dead will rise again. Dr. Watts says: “Perhaps there never was 
anything done in all past ages, and which was not a public fact, 
so well attested as the resurrection of Christ." When Jesus 
informed Martha that her brother would rise again, she re¬ 
sponded that she knew he would at the resurrection at the last 
day. From this we infer that the Jews, in general, believed 
there would be a resurrection at the last dav. The Sadducees, 
a small sect among the Jews, denied the resurrection; but they 
were materialists, and rejected a large part of the Old Testa¬ 
ment. The language of Jesus to Martha is very definite on 
the subject: “I am the resurrection and the life; he that 
believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live” 
(John xi. 25). 


THE PHILOSOPHY OF CHRISTIANITY. 


297 


2. The resurrection of Christ is positive proof that the dead 
will be raised. He was the “firstfruits of them that slept,” 
and this clearly implies that there will be second fruits. Paul 
definitely states: “If the dead rise not, then is Christ not raised. 
And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in 
your sins. Then they also who are fallen asleep in Christ are 
perished” (I. Cor. xv. 16-18). This language teaches that the 
denial of the resurrection is in substance rejecting the whole 
gospel. If there is no resurrection, our faith is vain, and we 
are without hope. Paul showed the Athenian philosophers that 
God would judge the world in righteousness by Jesus Christ; 
and he gave as evidence of the fact, that he had raised him 
from the dead. 

3. There is much discussion in reference to the nature of 
the resurrection. Some claim that the bodies of the saints will 
be raised precisely as was Christ’s body. It must be remem¬ 
bered that the body of Jesus did not see corruption, but the 
bodies of the saints do. The body of Jesus, however, was so 
changed when Paul saw it, that it was a different body from 
what it was when Thomas handled it. 

4. The key to the doctrine of the resurrection is found in 
the fifteenth chapter of First Corinthians. Gnosticism and 
Stoicism were at least two philosophic sects which gave the 
church much trouble. Epicureanism also had its influence and 
it altogether denied the doctrine of the resurrection. Gnosti¬ 
cism taught that sin could only be predicated of the body, and 
that the spirit, as soon as it was separated from the body, was 
free from sin. Stoicism taught that man by force of will could 
ent.irelv free himself from sin, and that this constituted the 
resurrection. Paul entirely refutes these theories, and presents 
the true doctrine, which is in harmony with the most advanced 
culture in the world. 

It is evident that. Paul teaches that the future body will be 
free from the gross material entering into the composition of 
the present body. The present transmutation going on in the 
body is against the theory that the old body planted will be 
raised as such. There is identity in the seed planted and that 


298 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


which grows up; so there will he, in that sense, identity in the 
body sown and the body raised. The body sown is material, 
but the body raised will be spiritual. It is a great mystery, but 
not more so than the mysteries of nature: 

‘For each one body that i’ th’ earth is sown, 

There is an uprising but of one for one; 

But for each grain that in the ground is thrown, 

Threescore or fourscore spring up thence for one; 

So then the wonder is not so great 

Of ours, as is the rising of the wheat.” 

» 


Those who claim that the Bible teaches the literal resurrec¬ 
tion of the old body rely almost entirely upon the thirty-seventh 
chapter of Ezekiel. Those preachers who are constantly refer¬ 
ring to this chapter to prove their theory of the resurrection, 
have certainly not given much attention to Scripture exegesis. 
If they had, it would be plain to them that the resurrection in 
this Scripture has reference to the whole house of Israel and 
no*c to the general resurrection. “These bones,” says the proph¬ 
et, “are the whole house of Israel.” Israel is buried among 
the nations, and the promise is that they shall be taken from 
their scattered condition, and restored to the land of Israel. 

The fact must not be overlooked that there is an identity 

«. 

between the present and the future body. Paul makes this 
plain in the use of the pronoun “it.” “It is sown in corrup¬ 
tion, it is raised in incorruption; it is soAvn in dishonor, it is 
raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 
it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body” (I. Cor. 
xv. 42-44). 


The body even in this life represents the condition of the 
spirit. As a rule, you can tell a good man from a bad one bv 
simply looking into his face. It is said that a detective can 
tell a pickpocket by the shape of his fingers. In the selection 
of his generals, Napoleon the Great was much influenced by 
the shape of the nose. It is claimed that Professor Sizer, so 
long the phrenological examiner of New York, could select a 
general every time. This shows that the body largely repre¬ 
sents the character of the spirit. The spirit molds the body, 




TIIE PHILOSOPHY OF CHRISTIANITY. 


290 


and the body’s identity is preserved by the spirit. When tin- 
spirit is gone, the body goes to its original elements. 

The future body will evidently express perfectly the charac¬ 
ter of the spirit. The good man will look like a good man, and 
a bad man will look like a bad one; thus the whole story of life 
will be told. The righteous will reach perfection, and the 
wicked will have no cloak with which to cover their shame. 

The bodies of the saints, who are alive at the coming of 
Christ, will also be changed. u For this we say unto you by the 
word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain unto the 
coming of the Lord, shall not anticipate them who are asleep" 
(I. Thess. iv. 15). The dead in Christ will arise before the 
living are changed; and together they will be caught up to 
meet the Lord in the air. So they will ever be with their Lord. 
The New Jerusalem conies down from heaven to earth, and 
the earth becomes part of the unfallen universe of God. There 
are new heavens and new earth, and paradise is regained. 
Man’s dominions are universal, and he studies God’s works 
throughout boundless space. 


CHAPTER IV. 


Tennyson's Science of Religion. 

Alfred Tennyson was born in 1809, a year specially prolific 
of great Englishmen; for it was the year in which were born 
Charles Darwin and W. E. Gladstone. While Tennyson repre¬ 
sented the age, the age certainly greatly influenced its great 
interpreter. As the “spacious times of great Elizabeth’’ had 
much to do in making Shakespeare, so the progressive times 
of Queen Victoria had much to do in making Tennyson. 

The critical Dr. William M. Dixon thus speaks: “A chron¬ 
icler of the mental life of his time, this we must call him, but 
we must add, a chronicler who was a consummate artist. 
And success in poetry of this kind, though far indeed from suc¬ 
cess in the highest kind, is neither easy nor the product of every 
generation. To chronicle the best ideas of any generation, it 
is necessary that one should feel inspired by them; that one 
should find them a source of real power; that, one should esti¬ 
mate them as of the first importance, and even find pleasure 
in them. But this is not possible for all men; it is rarely pos¬ 
sible for the poet whose penetrativeness, moral sagacity, and 
far, sure gaze disclose to him the true meanings and real issues 
of things. Such poets, often in advance of their generation, are 
more likely, save at epochs of rare inspiration, to find the times 
out of joint, the predominant current of ideas uninspiring, and 
the world into which they have been born an unweeded garden 
that runs to seed. The poetic spirit is an exacting spirit, A 
sympathetic spirit, you will say. Yes, sympathetic, but exact¬ 
ing. The needs of Tennyson’s nature were such that he found 
his age satisfying; its attitude of mind was his own attitude; 
and thus it was, as the chronicler of its mental life, he gained 
acceptance. Like Pope, he found the tersest expression for the 
dominant moods, the ruling ideas of his time, and became the 
historian of contemporary thought. Tennyson, like Pope, took 
the surest path to immortalitv; and when it is said that he 

300 


TENNYSON'S SCIENCE OF RELIGION. 301 

belongs to the history of language rather than to the history of 
thought, it is meant that, thoughtful as he was, and passionate 
with the warm human passions of a poet, neither did he present 
in his work the full features of the age in which he lived, nor 
had he for that age a message of moment. Like his age, he was 
himself in doubt about many things, and had no unifying con¬ 
ception, no harmonizing hypothesis to offer. On the minds of 
his own contemporaries Tennyson exerted no intellectual pres¬ 
sure, such as Carlyle exerted, nor did he awaken dulled or 
sleeping chords in the spiritual life by such strong, animating 
music as Browning’s. His office was to minister k> the general 
mass of readers by holding up the mirror in which their most 
intimate thoughts and feelings were reflected with charming 
simplicity and with 'marvelous exactness.” 

The influence of Carlyle on Tennyson was certainly whole¬ 
some ; it enlarged his intellectual sympathies, and caused him 
to select higher subjects and work upon more difficult problems. 
Carlyle said of him, in 1842, he was “carrying a bit of chaos 
about him which he was manufacturing into cosmos.” The vol¬ 
umes of 1842 doubtless caused Wordsworth to write, “He is 
decidedly the first of our living poets.” In 1844 Edgar Allan 
Poe was so much impressed with the artistic beauty of his style 
that he wrote, “I am not sure that Tennyson is not. the greatest 
of poets.” 

Tennyson was a great poet to the last. In 1885 the Fireside 
volume was published and very fitly dedicated to Robert Brown¬ 
ing. It contained many great poems, but the greatest of all was 
“The Ancient Sage.” It seems to be a kind of summary of the 
noblest and best in the teachings of Tennyson. In 1889, Brown¬ 
ing, just before his own death, wrote his last letter to Tennyson, 
congratulating the Laureate on his eightieth birthday: “Mv 
dear Tennvson, to'-morrow is vour birthday; indeed a memor- 
able one. Let me say I associate myself with the universal 
pride of our country in your glory, and in its hope that for 
many and many a year we may have your very self among us— 
secure that our poetry will be a wonder and delight to all those 
appointed to come after. And for my own part, let me further 


d02 


MACROCOSMUS. 


say, I have loved you dearly. May God bless you and 
vours.” 

d 

Tennyson was a great lover of science and a believer in the 
doctrine of evolution. He and Charles Darwin were personal 
friends. We once put this question to Mr. Darwin, ‘‘Does your 
doctrine of evolution interfere with true religion V’ “Certainly 
not," was the reply of Mr. Darwin. Bayard Taylor, who vis¬ 
ited Mr. Tennyson in 1857, gives the following description of 
the poet’s love of science: “As we walked over the cliffs to the 
Needles, I was struck by the variety of his knowledge. Not 
a flower on the downs escaped his notice, and the geology of the 
coast, both terrestrial and submarine, was perfectly familiar to 
him.” Tennyson was the interpreter of the highest in the 
science of his age. From his writings we can readily construct 
his science of religion. 

Morton Luce, one of his greatest critics, writes thus: “Kelig- 
ious inquiry and the doctrine of evolution were the two potent 
factors that influenced Tennyson’s thought, life and work; but 
two others, closely akin, must be added—they are the doubtful 
mission of science, and the varying fortunes of reform. Apart 
from the creed of his youth, Tennyson’s was a religion of 
inquiry— 

“‘He fought his doubts, and gathered strength; 

He would not make his judgment blind.’ 

“If this was true of Hallam, it was equally true of Tenny- 
son ; it is true of the higher philosophic minds of his time, 
Truth for men is everlasting seeking; so also, possibly, is relig¬ 
ion; and the word ‘creed’ was certain to be questioned, if not 
to suffer discredit, when it reached the nineteenth century. 
Tennyson’s, therefore, was also a religion of transition, and it 
may best be described in his own words as a clinging to faith 
beyond the forms of faith. The remaining point to notice is 
this—the transition was not uniform; it could not be. From 
first to last there were times when he was spiritually sanguine, 
and times when he was spiritually despondent; therefore, to 
estimate Tennyson’s religious belief is difficulty though the task 
is instructive, and should not be disappointing. But the general 


Tennyson’s science of religion. 303 

estimate alone concerns ns here, and it may be stated as fol¬ 
lows: if Tennyson disbelieved in dogma, he believed till the 
last in God and love and immortality, and lie based his belief 
upon intuition, instinct, the heart. Dogmatic assertion or dog¬ 
matic denial he equally condemned; and he sought a middle 
term, a faith that lay between a formal creed and a no less 
arrogant atheism. To this religion of compromise we may point 
with more complacency. Probably it was the only one possible ; 
probably it was the best for a poet—for such a poet, for such 
an age; and he rendered his age the important service of 
directing its religious inquiries to the noblest ends. ‘Less creed, 
more Christianity; search your own hearts,’ this was his mes¬ 
sage as it was also his practice, and no message could have 
been more welcome to a generation which 

“ ‘Had passed from a cheerless night to the dawn of a drearier day/ 

and which was seeking in haste and fear some escape from the 
dread alternatives of religious fatalism and agnostic material¬ 
ism, a ‘know-all’ creed and a ‘know-nothing’ philosophy. Of 
all this, the best and briefest summary may be discovered in the 

poem ‘Despair;’ yet it found no place in the poet’s intention. 
A man and woman who had freed themselves from the cramping 

‘creeds’ found still less comfort from the ‘know-nothing’ books; 
and they determined to drown themselves. But their moments 
before death were moments of love—so intense that they parted 
with 

“ ‘Never a kiss so sad, no, not since the coming of man.’ 

From that kiss we learn—what the poet overlooked, and they 
just failed to recognize—that 

“ ‘There’s nothing we can call our own but love/ 

and that love first makes life worth living, and next, from the 
•mere fact of its existence, is immortal. And finally, the man 
who has been dragged back from the water, cries with a con¬ 
viction deeper than despair, 

"‘Ah. yes, I have had some glimmer, at times, in my gloomiest woe, 
Of a God behind all—after all—the great God for aught that I know;’ 


304 


MACROCOSMUS. 


and when he has added in utter forgetfulness of his doubts, 

“‘O would I were yonder with her!’ 

he has given us the whole religion of Tennyson." 

1. Tennyson fully believed in God’s immanence in nature 
as taught in “The Higher Pantheism." This poem was read 
before the Metaphysical Society of England in I860 ; and it 
was included in the “Holy Grail” volume of Tennyson. The 
doctrine of “The Higher Pantheism'’ is that the whole universe 
consists of God and man. 

“For is He not all but that which has power to feel ‘1 am I’?” 

Tennyson fully advocated the universal presence of God, 
which is the scientific doctrine of God’s immanence and the 
Biblical doctrine of God’s providence. He was strictly opposed 
to the material pantheism of the Eleatic school and to the more 
modern pantheism of Spinoza. "For if he thunder by law, the 
thunder is yet his voice.” Tennyson's purpose was to reconcile 
modern science with the highest religious emotions of man. He 
gives us a very interesting science of religion. 

2. While Tennyson was the poet of modern science, he also 
recognized the truths of the intuitional school. He occupied 
the golden mean between the utilitarian and intuitional 
schools. I)r. William.M. Dixon savs: “In the history of tlieoi- 
ogy, Hn Memorianr marks the beginning of that, school of 
thought represented within the church bv Frederick D. Mau- 
rice—the Broad Church movement, as it is called, which was 
itself the outcome of the more liberal and deeper view of life, 
its meaning and its issues presented in the Transcendental phi¬ 
losophy. But while the influence of Kant and the later German 
thinkers, radiated in England bv Coleridge and Carlyle, are 
abundantly apparent in Tennyson’s philosophy fairly summed 
in this poem, we must be careful to abstain from any effort to 
find in the poetic statement of his thought any definite scheme 
or system. If T were asked to give some succinct statement of 
Tennyson’s philosophy, I should say that he emphasizes in every 
line of his reflective poetry the creed of the higher emotions. 


Tennyson’s science of religion. 


305 


Born as he was into a critical epoch, he could not but feel the 


uncertainties that mar, the doubt, that threatens the most firmly 
built and most zealously guarded dogmas. Yet Tennyson’s 
strength as a thinker seems to me to have been in the skeptical 
attitude of his mind, not indeed towards the older forms of 
faith, but towards the newer creeds of science, which in the first 
hush of their youth claimed an easy victory, ere the ground 


upon which the battle was to be fought lay clearly mapped or 
determined before men’s eyes. In his refusal to accept the neg¬ 
atives of science 1 —a refusal more than justified even before his 


own death—in his conviction that the uncertainties of the new 
teaching were more uncertain, the doubts as to the reality of its 
solutions of the old problems to be doubted more gravely than 
those attaching to revelation, in this'The penetration of his judg¬ 
ment was eminently proved. It is this grasp of the real amid 
innumerable false issues, this intellectual sanity, which digni¬ 
fies Tennyson as a thinker no less than a poet. If he lacked 
the power of imaginative synthesis, which in a brain like 
Plato’s marshals the facts of the world under the unity 
of a self-consistent system, his analytic faculty probed deep 
and far. 

As a thinker Tennyson was always cautious and occupied 
the golden mean; hence I call him a golden mean philosopher. 
On the one hand he examines dogmatic religion, and on the 
other, modern thought; and sometimes with ancient philosophy 
and sometimes with the philosophy of evolution he reaches the 
middle ground. “It is hard,” he said, “to believe in God; but 
it is harder not to believe.. I believe in God, not from what I 
see in nature, but from what I find in man.” Tennyson’s sci¬ 
ence of religion was largely based upon the higher emotions. 
When the head failed, the heart would convince the poet of the 
existence of God and a future state. Man’s higher nature re¬ 
lates him to the God of the universe. 

3. Tennyson insisted that the progress of civilization points 
to God and a future state. 


“Throve and branch’d from clime to clime.” 


MACKOCOSMUS. 


oOG 


As the cliild needs the father to train it lip to manhood, so the 
human race could not have readied manhood without the care 
of the heavenly Father. It is absurd to suppose there could 


bo a child without parents ; and it is equally as absurd to sup¬ 
pose the human race could have existed without God. Tenny¬ 
son is certainly correct in his position that it is more difficult 
not to believe in God than to believe in him. Civilization cer¬ 


tainly points to the providential care of God. 

Tennyson was certainly right in claiming that progress that 
ends in death is really no progress at all. A e can see no pur¬ 
pose either in the individual or the species, if death ends all. 
There can be no true evolution that does not extend beyond 
the grave. 

“The herald of a higher race, 

And of himself in higher place.” 


Man was made for universal progress, and the inner man 
will triumph over the shock of death. 

Mind will survive the shock of death, 

It mingles not with lifeless clay; 

So when man breathes his latest breath, 

The soul departs for endless day. 


God has ordained that the conscious spirit shall outlive all 
'the ages of material phenomena, and be prepared for the reali¬ 
ties of the unseen universe. 

4. Tennyson taught that the higher instincts of man point 
to God and a future state. Man is instinctively a dependent 
being. As there can not be a second without a first, or a here 
without a there, I can not see how there can be a dependent 
being without an independent one. As man is dependent, there 
must be a supreme Ruler, who is independent. Man’s higher 
instincts seem clearly to guarantee the existence of God. Ten¬ 
nyson had great confidence in this argument. lie thought it 
hard to believe in God, but when he studied man’s higher in¬ 
stincts, he thought it much harder not to believe. 

Man has an instinctive anticipation of a future state of ex¬ 
istence. IIis own life can not be explained on any other sup¬ 
position than the doctrine of a future state. Tennyson says: 


tenj^yson’s science oe religion. 


307 


“My own dim life should teach me this, 

That life shall live forever more.” 

The thought of the poet is this: “This instinct of immortal¬ 
ity is as deeply rooted in my nature as are the instincts of mor¬ 
tality ; they are true to this life; the other must be true to the 
larger life by which alone it was brought into being.” The 
higher instincts are largely at the foundation of Tennyson’s 
science of religion. Man’s nature can only be complete in God 
and a future state. 

5. Conscience also points to God and a future world. It 
is impossible to understand the judge belonging to* the higher 
nature of man without admitting the existence of the supreme 
Judge of the universe. Ex-President Porter, of Yale, says: 
“The universe is a thought as well as a thing. As fraught with 
design, it reveals thought as well as force. The thought in¬ 
cludes the origination of the forces and their laws as well as the 
combination and use of them. These thoughts must include 
the whole universe; it follows, then, that the universe is con¬ 
trolled by a single thought, or the thought of an individual 
thinker.” Dr. Porter’s argument is certainly correct, and we 
can use the same reasoning in reference to conscience. It 
passes judgment upon a man’s acts, and this judgment can only 
be explained on the ground that there is a just Judge over all. 
John Locke says: “The idea of a supreme Being, infinite in 
power, goodness and wisdom, whose workmanship we are, and 
upon whom we depend, and the idea of ourselves, as under¬ 
standing, rational beings, being such as are clear in us, would, 
I suppose, if duly considered and pursued, afford such foun¬ 
dations of our duty and rules of action as might place morality 
among the sciences capable of demonstration, wherein, I doubt 
not, but from self-evident propositions, by necessary conse¬ 
quences as incontestable as those in mathematics, the measures 
of right and wrong might be made out,.” 

Conscience can not be understood unless we admit the doc¬ 
trine that there is a future life for man. It would not make 
cowards of us all, if death ended all. God is in the conscience 


MACROCOSM US. 


308 

of man, and woe be to him who does not heed the dictates of the 

% 

divine monitor. Shakespeare says: 

“What do I fear? Myself? There’s none else by; 

Richard loves Richard; that is, I am I. 

Is there a murderer here? No; yes, I am; 

Then fly. What, from myself? Great reason; why? 

Lest I revenge. What? Myself upon myself? 

Alas! I love myself. Wherefore? for any good 
That I myself have done unto myself? 

Oh, no! alas! I rather hate myself. 

For hateful deeds committed by myself.” 

Shakespeare further says: 

“Conscience is a thousand swords.” 

6. The human will points to the Supreme Will of this uni¬ 
verse. Tennyson says: 

“Our wills are ours, we know not how; 

Our wills are ours to make them thine.” 

Man is a free moral agent, and can choose for himself; he 
is also a dependent being; and it. is certainly his duty to con¬ 
form his will to the Supreme Will of the universe. > This is 
certainly in harmony with the teachings of the Christ, 
who prayed that his Father’s will should be done on earth 
as it is done in heaven. It is not only a man’s duty to- con¬ 
form his will to the divine will, but he should, also, do what 
he can to transform the rebellious wills of others to the 
divine will. 

7. Tennyson’s last and strongest argument in favor of the 
existence of God and a future state is immortal love. In the 
first stanza of his prologue to “In Memoriam,” we have the fol¬ 
lowing : 

“Strong Son of God, immortal Love, 

Whom we, that have not seen thy face, 

By faith, and faith alone, embrace, 

Believing where we can not prove.” 

Tn this connection we quote the following from “The An¬ 
cient Sage”: 


Tennyson’s science of religion. 


309 


"For nothing worthy proving can be proven, 

Nor yet disproven: wherefore thou be wise, 
Cleave ever to the sunnier side of doubt, 

And cling to Faith beyond the forms of Faith.” 


llio universality of love is strong evidence of the existence 
of God and of a future state. The love of David and Jonathan, 
Jesus and Lazarus, Tennyson and Hallam extends far beyond 
the confines of this sublunary sphere. It reaches even to 
heaven itself, and it is eternal. Love for the great and good 
who have gone into eternity is one of the very strongest argu¬ 
ments for immortality. 


"And love will last as pure and whole 
As when he loved me here in time , 

And at the spiritual prime 
Rewaken with the dawning soul.” 

Tennyson could not see how such love could be lost. 

"Love’s too precious to be lost, 

A little grain shall not be spilt.” 


When human love is so perfect and so enduring, we must 
look beyond the grave for its completion. Love is an imperish¬ 
able root, and we can only look upon death in the sense of trans¬ 
plantation ; love is a flower taken from an earthly garden, and 
transplanted into the eternal garden of heaven. The death of 
his friend turned the thoughts of Tennvson to the nature of 
death and the mvsteries of life. Sorrow lifted the heart of the 
poet upward, and material love became spiritualized. It is 
certainly difficult to grasp the full meaning of death. “I 
change, but I can not die,” said Shelley. “There is no death; 
what seems so is transition,” said Longfellow 7 . In the follow¬ 
ing lines our great poet became quite hopeful: 

"Oh yet we trust that somehow good 
Will be the final goal of ill, 

To pangs of nature, sins of will, 

Defects of doubt, and taints of blood; 


310 


MACBOCOSM US. 


“That nothing walks with aimless feet; 
That not one life shall be destroyed, 
Or cast as rubbish to the void, 

When God has made the pile complete. 


“Behold, we know not anything; 

I can but trust that good shall fall 
At last far off—far off—at last to all, 
And every winter change to spring.” 


Iii this connection I want to quote the following from Thack¬ 
eray: “If love lives through all life; and survives through all 
sorrow; and remains steadfast with us through all changes, and 
in all darkness of spirit burns brightly; and, if we die, deplores 
us forever, and loves still equally; and exists with the very last 
gasp and throb of the faithful bosom—whence it passes through 
the pure soul, beyond death, surely it shall be immortal. 
Though we who remain are separated from it, is it not ours in 
heaven ? If we love still those we lose, can we altogether lose 
those we love?” 

“In Memoriamwhich largely contains Tennyson’s science 
of religion, is certainly one of the very greatest of religious 
poems. The critical Morton Luce says: “If power over contem¬ 
porary life and thought is any test of the greatness of a poem, 
‘In MemorianT is great indeed. Xo creation of art has ever 
embodied the spirit of the age in a form so perfect and so fair; 
none has ever administered such beauty and bounty of moral, 
emotional, and even the intellectual life of its own dav. In 


this respect of contemporary influence there is nothing like ‘In 
Memoriam’ in the literature of the world. Virgil’s ‘Aeneid,’ 
Pope’s ‘Essay on Alan,’ Goethe’s ‘Faust,’ Dante’s ‘Divine Com¬ 
edy,* Spenser’s ‘Faerie Queen.,’ these, or any other poems that 
may be called representative of an age or race, surely fall short 
of ‘In Memoriam.’ To match it in this particular it is my 
fanev that we should turn to Tennyson himself, and allow ‘The 
Idylls’ to rank next; and to these ‘The Princess’ might possibly 
be added. The genius of fifty years, the wisdom and beauty 
of a thousand years, is in them all. Could we separate ‘In 
Memoriam’ and its influence from the life and literature of the 






tejnnyson’s science oe religion. 


311 


\ 


years that form tho second half of the nineteenth century, that 
great life and literature would he altogether unrecognizable, 
and it need hardly be added that the difference would be one 
of irreparable loss. Even now, whoever would get and hold 
quickly and surely the best that those fifty years have to offer 
of what is wise and good and graceful, mingled with mental 
and spiritual wealth of all the ages past, let him learn ‘In Me- 
moriam’ by heart, and comprehend it, and let him further rest 
assured that if nine-tenths of his fellows w r ho speak the Eng¬ 
lish tongue would follow his example, then our common human¬ 
ity would be advanced by centuries nearer to its consumma¬ 
tion.'’ 


CHAPTER V. 

Robert Browning's Philosophy of Religion. 


Browning was a disciple of the German school of idealism. 
G. W. Cooke thus writes: “Whenever there is a growth of ideal¬ 
ism, literature feels the new life it creates. Most of the great 
literary periods have been associated with a revival of this phi¬ 
losophy in some one of its many forms. There are an impulse, 
an energy, and a largeness of conception in what it has to teach, 
and in the life it produces, which are conducive to literary 
creation. Whatever its limitations, it affects the imagination 
and the emotions, gives the largest conceptions of nature and 
man, and kindles the soul with the fire of renewing life. 

“Idealism is the philosophy of hope and the future. It 
clings not to the low earth, but embraces the circle of the heav¬ 
ens. Thought it raises to the place of supreme arbiter in the 
realm of human experience. It gives the imagination objects 
worthy of its creative vision, and it lifts the whole mind with 
an exalted sense of its relations to Absolute Being.” 

Mr. Cooke still further speaks as follows: “Three men whose 
names occupy conspicuous places in recent English literature 
have represented the later effects of German idealism. These 
are Carlyle, Emerson and Browning, idealists all, but in a 
manner to bring out the emphatic individuality which they each 
exhibited. Their marked individuality and independent spirit, 
the result in no small measure of their idealism, are shown on 
every page which they have written.” 

Again Mr. Cooke says: “Browning has exerted an influ¬ 
ence on literature as fresh and suggestive as that of Carlyle 
or Emerson. He has the same unique power; he has the same 
subtle gift of insight, and he has the same intensity of convic¬ 
tion which these men possessed. He is an original force in 
literature, never an imitator, but one to arouse and to stimu¬ 
late all who come after him. TTe stands apart bv himself as 
312 r 


ROBERT BROWNING’S PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 313 

a poet. He has no forerunner, and he is likely to have no suc¬ 
cessor. 

“The last of the men directly affected by the incoming of 
German idealism, Browning, has suffered nothing of its better 
spirit to be lost. To him it has given the same deep-searching 
sense of the wonder of life as to those who went before him. 
He, too, has been environed by mystery and an infinite life. 
The world has revealed itself to him with a freshness as of 
spring, and with a joy as of flowers blooming on sunny slopes.” 

1. Browning taught that true religion requires the highest 
spiritual culture. This is well illustrated in “Paracelsus,’’ 
which was written by Browning when he was only twenty-three 
years of age. It is certainly a masterpiece. Dr. Josiah Boyce, 
of Harvard University, thus speaks of it: “The collection of 
poems belonging to what may be called the ‘Faust-cycle^ in the 
literature of the present century, contains no extended work 
whose machinery of plot and of incident is, when externally 
regarded, simpler than Browning’s ‘Paracelsus.’ The rela¬ 
tions of hero and tempter are nowhere freer from external com¬ 
plication than when the hero is explicitly the deceiver of his 
own soul. With Paracelsus this is actually the case. 

“For classing ‘Paracelsus’ with the Faust-cycle in this way 
there are many grounds. The real Paracelsus was a contem¬ 
porary of the historic prototype of Faust. The two figures 
were, as a fact, closely linked in Goethe’s mind, as they must 
have been in Browning’s. Such a classification in nowise de¬ 
tracts from the sort of originality which the poem possesses, 
while it aids us in finding our way when we consider its prob¬ 
lem. The absence of an external tempter in nowise excludes 
the poem from the Faust-cycle; for the tempter in most such 
creations is the hero’s other self, given a magical and plastic 
outer reality, as with Manfred. As regards the positive aspects 
of the analogy, the typical hero of the poem of the Faust-cycle 
is a man of the Renaissance, to whom the church is no author¬ 
ity, and to whom the world is magically full either of God’s 
or of Satan’s presence, or of both. This hero risks his soul in 


314: 


MACROCOSM US. 


a. quest for some absolute fulfillment, of pleasure, power, wis¬ 
dom or peace. Thus staking* everything, he gets, like an early 
voyager to the New World, either the doom of the outlaw, or the 
glories of the conquistator; but meanwhile he comes near, if he 
does not meet, an evil end in the abvss. 

“Thus regarded, the problem of Paracelsus readily defines 
itself We are to study the career of a spiritual relative of 
Faust. Accordingly, we have to consider his original quest, 
and the strong Satanic delusion to which he fell prey. In such 
a light we may hope to express the sense of his tragedy.” 

* Again Dr. Boyce says: “For Browning, God is truly re- 
vealed within, not without, our own human nature. There¬ 
fore, and here is the point of Browning’s criticism of occultism, 
it is in our spiritual communion with one another, it is in our 
world of human loves, and even of human hates, that one gets 
in touch with God. When man really meets man, in love, in 
confiict, in passion, then the knowledge of God gets alive in both 
men. The true antithesis is not between the pure intellect and 
the affections; for your occultist is no partisan of the pure intel¬ 
lect. Tie, too, is in love, in mystical love, but. with outer na¬ 
ture, Hor is the antichesis that between the scientific spirit 
and the spirit of active benevolence. Paracelsus, as one de¬ 
voted to the art of healing, is from the first abstractlv but tran- 

c / »j 

scendently benevolent. ITis is simply not the scientific spirit. 
The antithesis between knowledge, as the occultist conceives it, 
and dove,' as the poet views it, is the contrast between look¬ 
ing in the world of outer nature for a symbolic revelation of 
God, and looking in the moral world, the world of ideals, of voli¬ 
tion, of freedom, of hope, and of human passion, for the direct 
incarnation of, the loving and the living God. The researches 
of the occultist are fascinating, capricious—and resultless. It 
is the student of men who talks with God face to face, as a 
familiar friend. The occultist, peering about in the dark, sees, 
like Moses in the cleft of the rock, only God’s back. The truly 
occult world is that where the lovers and warriors meet and 
part. There alone God is revealed. Search as you will in the 


ROBERT BROWNING’S PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 


315 


far east, in the deserts, in the sea-caves, you will never find anv 
natural object more verily occult than are his love’s eves to the 
lover. Browning’s mysticism thus has always an essentiallv 
human object before it. He therefore sometimes depicts, with 
especial fondness, the awakened occultist, who has just learned 
where lies the true secret of our relations with God.” 

Browning’s religion was largely that of spiritual culture. 
Without such culture life is a failure. The summum bonum 
of good can not be found in wealth, pleasure or knowledge. 
The problem in “Paracelsus” is the same as that in Ecclesiastes. 
Man’s higher spiritual nature relates him to the world to come, 
and success, in the true sense, is impossible without its devel¬ 
opment. Paracelsus, without spiritual culture, imagined that 
God had selected him to dispense knowledge unknown to the 
rest of the race. ITe was an occultist, and thought that he could 
best accomplish his mission by ignoring all the wisdom of the 
past. He thought that God had inspired him to find in tin- 
realm of nature remedies for all diseases. Like all of his 
class, his life was doomed to failure, and he discovered his mis¬ 
take when it w r as too late to remedy it, so far as this world ; s 
concerned. It is sad to think that so many, even at the begin¬ 
ning of the twentieth century, are following in the footsteps of 
Paracelsus. The poet Aprile presented higher ideals to this 
occultist ; but it is very difficult to get rid of old thoughts and 
old habits. It was a long time before Paracelsus could be fully 
convinced that he did not possess infinite knowledge. He, like 
the hero in Ecclesiastes, had made extensive researches, and 
finally was compelled to confess that all was vanity and vexa¬ 
tion of spirit. Before his death Paracelsus discovered the fact 
that his relationship to God was the important thing. He was 
fully converted to the principles of a higher spiritual life; and 
wanted to die with one hand in that of his friend Eestus in this 
world, and the other in the hand of the poet Aprile in the world 
to come. Thus Paracelsus teaches us the highest spiritual 
truth. 

2. The Theism of Robert Browning. Robert Browning 
was not only a theist, but he was a Christian theist. Hr. Royce 


316 


MACROCOSMUS. 


says: ‘‘Browning is a poet who very frequently mentions God, 
and who a number of times has elaborately written concerning 
his nature and his relations to man. The arguments in ques¬ 
tion are frequently stated in dramatic form, and not as Brown¬ 
ing’s own utterances. Paracelsus, Caliban, David in the poem 
‘Saul,’ both Count Guido and the Pope in ‘The King in the 
Book,’ Faust in the "’Parley ings,’ and Ferishtah, are all permit¬ 
ted to expound their theology at considerable length. Kar- 
shish, Abt Vogler, Rabbi Ben Ezra, Ixion, and a number of 
others, define views about God which are more briefly stated, 
but not necessarily less comprehensible. On the other hand, 
there are two poems, ‘Christmas Eve’ and ‘Easter Day,’ which, 
without abandoning the dramatic method, approach nearer to 
indicating, although they do not directly express, Browning’s 
personal views on the theistic problem. These poems are im¬ 
portant, although they must not be taken too literally. Finally, 
in ‘La Saisiaz’ and in the ‘Reverie’ in ‘Asolando," Browning 
has entirely laid aside the dramatic form, and has spoken in 
his own person concerning his attitude towards theology. I 
do not intend by this catalogue to exhaust the material for a 
study of Browning’s theism, but as important specimens these 
passages may serve. As for the method of using them for the 
interpretation of Browning’s manner of dealing with the idea of 
God, that method seems by no means difficult. Whether it is 
Browning himself, or any one of his dramatic creations; 
whether it is Count Guido or the Pope, Caliban or Rabbi Ben 
Ezra, who speaks of the nature of God, the general manner of 
facing the problem is, on the whole, very characteristically the 
same, so far as the character in question proceeds to any posi¬ 
tive conclusion, and that however various the results reached, 
or the personalities dramatically presented. This manner, 
identical in such highly contrasted cases, at once marks itself 
as Browning’s own manner, and it is, as already observed, a 
decidedly original one, not indeed as to the ideas advanced, but 
as to points emphasized, the doubts expressed and the general 
spirit manifested. The road Godwards is for Browning the 


ROBERT BROWNING’S PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 317 

same, whoever it is that wanders over that lonely path, or pauses 
by the wayside after obtaining a distant view of the goal, or 
traitorously abandons the quest, or reaches at last the moment 
of blowing the slughorn before the Dark Tower. 

“In all cases the idea of God and the problem of God’s na¬ 
ture define themselves for Browning substantially thus: First, 
a glance at the universe, so to speak, at once informs you that 
yon are in the presence of what Browning loves to call Power. 
Power is the first of Browning’s two names for God. How, 
this term ‘Power’ means from the start a great deal. Brown¬ 
ing and his theologizing characters, say, for instance, even Cali¬ 
ban and Count Guido, resemble Paracelsus in standing at first 
where at all events many men aspire at last to stand. Namely, 
this Power that they know as here in the world is not only One, 
real, and in its own measure and grade defined, so far as pos¬ 
sible, as world-possessing, but it is so readily conceived as intel¬ 
ligent that, even when most skeptical and argumentative, they 
spend no time in laboring to prove its intelligence. The con¬ 
ception of mere blind nature as an independent and substan¬ 
tially real realm, hiding the God of power, they hardly possess, 
or, if they possess such conception, a word suffices to set it 
aside. If, like Caliban, they work out an elaborate argument 
from design, as if it were necessary to prove the Creator’s wis¬ 
dom from his works, the argument is accompanied by a cer¬ 
tain sense that it has either trivial or else, like David’s survey 
of creation, merely illustrative value. The God of power is, 
and he means to work his powerful will. Hence he is never a 
mere Unknowable, like Spencer’s Absolute. That is what one 
simply finds. That is fact for you whenever you open your 
eves. In other words, Browning makes light of all those an¬ 
cient and modern views of nature, nowadays so familiar to 
many of us, which conceive of mechanical laws, or blind nature- 
forces, as the actually given and independently real causes of 
all our experience. The dying John in the desert prophesies 
that there will hereafter come such views, but regards them as 
too absurd for refutation. Materialism, and other forms of 


318 


MACROCOSM US. 


pure naturalism, never became, for Browning, expressions of 
any definite recognizable possibilities.” 

Dr. Boyce, in what precedes, correctly presents one side of 
Browning’s theism. He has an insight into the poet’s theology 
that probably no other man has. We will now call upon him 
in his own inimitable way to give us the other side of Brown¬ 
ing’s theology. “But now, in strong contrast to this first aspect 
of Browning’s theism, is a second aspect, and one which forms 
the topic of our poet’s most elaborate reasoning processes. 
God as power is grasped by an intuition. There is, however, 
another intuition; namely, that God is love. This latter intui¬ 
tion, taken by itself, Browning can as little prove as the forego¬ 
ing. What it means, we have yet to see. But its presence in 
the poet’s mind introduces a new aspect of his doctrine. The 
difficulty, namely, that here appears, is the one which taxes 
every power of his reflection. The difficulty is: How can the 
God of power be also the God of love? Neither of the intuitions 
can be proved ; neither is a topic of more than the 'most summary 
reasoning process. But the relation between the intuitions is 
a matter worthy of the most extensive and considerate study. 
Moreover, to Browning’s mind, here lies the heart of our human 
interest in divine matters. Hence dramatic portrayals of 
even the bravest efforts to make the transition in thought from 
the God of power to the God of love; even the dimmest move¬ 
ments of the human spirit in its search for the conception of 
the God of love—all these will be, in Browning’s view, of fasci¬ 
nating interest. 

“But now what, from Browning’s point of view, does one 
mean by speaking of God as love ? As T once tried to point 
out, Browning uses the word dove,’ in his more metaphysical 
passages, in a very pregnant and at the same time inclusive 
sense—almost, one might sav, in a technical term. Love, as he 
here employs it, includes indeed the tender affections, but is in 
nowise limited to them. Love, in its most general use, means, 
for Browning, very much as for Swedenborg, the affection that 
any being has towards what that creature takes to be his own 
good. Paracelsus, in his dying confession, declares: 


ROBERT BROWNING’S PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 


319 


“ ‘In my own heart love has not been made wise 
To trace love’s faint beginnings in mankind; 

To know even hate is but a mask of love’s; 

To see a good in evil, and a hope 
In ill-success; to sympathize, be proud 
Of all half-reasons, faint aspirings, dim 
Struggles for truth, their poorest fallacies, 

Their prejudice and fears and cares and doubts; 

All with a touch of nobleness, despite 
Their error, upward tending although weak, 

Like plants in mines, which never saw the sun, 

But dream of him, and guess where he may be, 

And do their best to climb and get to him.’ 

“In brief, tlien. the totality of human concern, on their 
positive side, all passion, all human life, in so far as these tend 
towards growth, expansion, increasing intensity and ideality- 
all these, however base their expressions may now seem, con¬ 
stitute, in us mortals, love. Stress is laid, of course, upon this 
expanding, this positive and ideal tendency of love. 1 This is 
the differentia of love amongst the affections. Content, sloth, 
indolence, hesitancy, even where these are conventionally moral 
states, as in ‘The Statue and the Bust,’ are cases of what is not 
love. Strenuousness, however, even when its object is the the¬ 
ory of the Greek particles, is, as in ‘The Grammarian’s Fu¬ 
neral,’ an admirable case of love. Ixion loves, even in the 
midst of his wrath and anguish: 

“ ‘Pallid birth of my pain—where light, where light is, aspiring 

Thither I rise, whilst thou—Zeus, keep the godship and sink!’ 

“If this, then, in man, is love, what must it mean to say that 
God is love ? It must mean, first, that there is something in 
God that corresponds to every one of these aspirations of the 
creature. Now, this, to he sure, is so far what even Aristotle 
had in one sense said. For Aristotle declares that the world 
loves Gocl, and that the world is thus moved to imitate—every 
finite being in its own measure—God’s perfection. But, in 
Aristotle’s conception, it is the world that loves; God is the 
beloved. But now Browning plainly means more than this, 
lie means that to every affection of the creature, in so far as 




320 


MACROCOSMUS. 


it aims upwards, towards greater intensity and ideality, there 
is something in, God that not, only corresponds, but directly re¬ 
sponds : 

“ ‘Thoughts hardly to be packed 
Into a narrow act, 

Fancies that broke through language and escaped; 

All I could never be. 

All, men ignored in me, 

This, I was worth to God, whose wheel the pitcher shaped.’ 

“God’s love for us, if it exists, must thus have not merely 
to aim at some distant perfection and heavenly bliss for us, 
but to find in our very blindness, suffering, weakness, ineffi¬ 
ciency—yes, even in our very faultiness, so far as it involves 
a striving upwards—something that he met with appreciation, 
sympathy, care and praise, as being love’s ‘faint beginning’ in 
us. God’s love, in Browning’s mind, does not mean merely or 
even mainly his tenderness or pity for us, or his desire to see 
us happy in his own arbitrarily appointed way, but his delight 
in our very oddities, in the very narrowness of our ardent indi¬ 
viduality. It means his sharing of our very weaknesses, his 
sympathy with even our low views of himself, so long as all 
these things mean our growing like the plant in the mine that 
has never seen the light. If God views our lives in this 
way, then, and only then, does he love us. He must love us, 
at the very least, as the artist loves his creations, heart¬ 
ily, open-mindedly, joyously, not because we are fashioned 
in one abstract image, but because in our manifoldness 
we altogether reflect something of the wealth in which he 
abounds. This is the view of April©, never later abandoned 
by Browning.” 

Robert Browning was a student of German philosophy, and 
his views of God do not differ essentiallv from those of Hegel. 
With him God and the human soul are the greatest realities 
in the universe. God is more real than anything else, and the 
existence of God is just as certain as the existence of man. In 
“I’he Ring and the Book” we have the following: 



ROBERT BROWNING’S PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. o'Z i 

“I find first 

Writ down for very A, B, C, of fact, 

‘In the beginning, God made heaven and earth.’ ” 

Browning did not believe that the heavens and earth created 
themselves, but that God created them. While he may not al¬ 
ways have been considered orthodox, 1 have not been able to find 
anything in his writings out of harmony with true Christian 
theism. Ilis influence has been powerful against materialism 
and atheism. 

3. What Browning Thought About Sin. The poet consid¬ 
ered sin a perversion of the right, and an eternal loss to the sin¬ 
ner. lie did not think that the sinner could ever be just what 
he would have been if he had not sinned. To him hell itself 
means eternal loss. If we neglect and pervert our knowledge 
here, the poet teaches that such neglect and perversion insures 
our future punishment. We can not escape the consequences 
of sin. 

Browning teaches that evil is of use in this world; that it 
stimulates the growth of good; and that our progress in the 
divine life greatly depends upon our fighting sin. Like St. 
Augustine, he claims that our vices can be framed into a ladder, 
with stepping-stones on which to rise to higher things, if we 
will but tread beneath our feet each deed of shame. As pain 
is essential to progress and civilization in this world, so the sys¬ 
tem of evil is so overruled by the Almighty that it is a means 
by which his people rise to the highest spiritual things. The 
system of evil does not, in any way, interfere with the love of 
God. An old preacher once said that the wicked are as happy 
in hell as they can be anywhere. Heaven means principle, and 
hell means sin. The reason, 1 believe, that some persons are 
in danger of eternal punishment is the fact that the Christ, says 
they are in danger of eternal sin. Eternal punishment must 
be the result of eternal sin. Man can commit eternal sin in 
spit -9 of the love of God; so there may be eternal punishment 
in spite of the love of God. 

4. Browning’s Doctrine of a Future State. The poet was 
a firm believer in a future state. In “Prospice” and in his 


MACROOOSMUS. 


322 

last words to the race in the Epilogue to “Asolando,” he clearly 
shows that he has no fear in death. Some of his strongest argu¬ 
ments in favor of a future state are given in his poem entitled 
“Cleon,” where the hero is supposed to believe in annihilation. 
The gloomy picture of annihilation, so repugnant to the higher 
nature of man, is made so graphic that even the Greek hero 
can not exactly see why it should be so. In “Saul,” the poet 
calls the present state only “life’s dream,” and “death’s minute 
of night” js only introductory to “life’s dayspring.” The dying 
Paracelsus shows great confidence, as the following language 
clearly indicates: 

“If I stoop 

Into a dark tremendous sea of cloud, 

It is but for a time; I press God’s lamp 
Close to my breast; its splendour, soon or late. 

Will pierce the gloom: I shall emerge one day.” 

The poet gives us in the “Epistle of Karshish” a very in¬ 
teresting description of the mental state of Lazarus after his 
resurrection. This is an acknowledgment on the part of Brown¬ 
ing of the supernatural claims of Jesus. The poet did not have 
great faith in external evidence; but he firmly believed in the 
incarnation, and consequently, in the superhuman powers, of 
the Christ. The resurrection of Lazarus is positive evidence of 
a future state. 

With Browning the soul was more real than anything else 
except God. In “Parleyings with Erancis Fur ini,” he says: 

“Call consciousness the soul . . . 

Getting itself aware through stuff decreed 
Thereto.” 

Again, in the same work, he says in reference to evolu¬ 
tionists : 

“ ’Tis the tiptop of things to which you strain 
Your vision, until atoms, protoplasm, 

And what, and whence and how may be the spasm 
Which sets all going, stop you: down perforce 
Needs must your observation take its course, 


ROBERT BROWNING’S PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 323 

Since there is no moving upwards; link by link 
You drop to where the atoms somehow think, 

Feel, know themselves to be: the world’s begun, 

Such as we recognize it.” 

The poet perfectly agrees with the Christ that the soul is 
more valuable than everything else in the world. It is that 
part of man that brings him in contact with the Infinite. In 
“Parleyings with Bernard de Mandeville,” the poet says: 

“Mind seeks to see. 

Touch, understand, by mind inside of me, 

The outside mind.” 

Soul is more than sense; it wants to know whence came 
things, and the purpose of their existence. Browning compares 
its approximation to God in knowledge to the line of the asymp¬ 
tote that speedeth the curve. Man can always approach God 
in knowledge, but never reach him. This makes eternal prog¬ 
ress possible to man. 

The poet argues immortality for man on account of his 
constant search for truth. In “Christmas Eve” he says: 

“Knows, in his conscience, more 
Of what right is, than arrives at birth 
In the best men’s acts.” 

Man is greater than this earth, and can not find all truth 
here. We must have a mission beyond this world. The poet, 
in “Pauline,” savs: 

“I know this earth is not my sphere, 

For I can not so narrow me but that 
I still exceed it.” 

The following I believe to be the principal arguments of 
the poet Browning in favor of the doctrine of a future state: 
(1) The reality of the human soul; (2) this world is not suffi¬ 
cient for the achievements of the human soul; (3) man’s prog¬ 
ress in knowledge demands a future life for its perfection; (4) 
this life is a failure without a future state, as taught by the 
poet in “Paracelsus,” and other poems; (5) love is immortal, 
and it requires a future state for its complete satisfaction. 


324 


MACROCOSM US. 


5. The Attitude of Browning Towards the Christian Relig¬ 
ion. Skeptics have been converted to Christianity by a careful 
study of the poet Browning. Dr. Edward Berdoe, author of 
“The Browning Cyclopaedia/’ gives us the following: ‘‘Twenty 
years ago, after a long course of reading the works of agnostic 
teachers, I ceased to believe the fundamental doctrines of Chris¬ 
tianity. About two years after the painful necessity of break¬ 
ing with all my old associations in religious matters, I had 
approached as near to agnosticism as a reasonable being may; 
that is to say, I no longer believed in the God of the Bible, and 
did not think that any conception of the Supreme Power pre¬ 
sented to the mind in any of the religious systems which I had 
investigated was supported by sufficient evidence to satisfy a 
scientific thinker of the present day. On the whole, such frag¬ 
ments of Buddhism as I had been able to appreciate seemed to 
be more satisfactory than anything else in the way of religions 
teaching, but, so far as my own mind was concerned, I had suc¬ 
ceeded in making a tabula rasa, not without many regrets at 
the loss of old ideals and the earnest hope that it might not be 
long before something better would replace it. 

‘ It was my good fortune one dav to hear a brilliant and 
powerful lecture by Mr. Moncure Conway, at South Place 
Chapel, Friesbury, on Robert Browning’s ‘Sordello.’ Up to 
that moment I had read nothing of the works of that poet save 
a few scraps which appear as quotations, usually from ‘Rabbi 
Ben Ezra.’ The first poem T read was ‘Saul.’ I soon recog¬ 
nized that 1 was in the grasp of a strong hand, and as I contin¬ 
ued to read ‘Paracelsus,’ ‘Men and Women,’ and ‘A Death in 
the Desert,’ the feeling came over me that in Browming I had 
found my religious teacher, one who could put me right on a 
hundred points which had troubled my mind for many years, 
and which had ultimately caused me to abandon the Christian 
religion. I joined the Browning Society, and in the discus¬ 
sions which followed the reading of the papers, T found the 
opportunity of having mv doubts resolved,' not by theological 
arguments, but by those suggested by Browning as ‘solving for 


ROBERT BROWNING'S PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION. 


325 

me all questions in the earth and out of it.’ By slow and pain¬ 
ful steps I found my way back to the faith I had forsaken.” 

Some men can be taught better by the poet than they can 
by the scientist. Prof. John Tyndall fully recognized this fact 
in his very interesting lecture on “The Scientific Use of the 
Imagination.” He declared that the poet and the man of sci¬ 
ence were two halves of a dissevered world, and could not well 
do without each other. If Charles Darwin had been a student 
of the poet Browning, the neglected half of his dissevered world 
would have been educated, and the great scientist would have 
been a happier man. In his old age Mr. Darwin greatly re¬ 
gretted the fact that he had neglected the reading of poetry and 
the hearing of music. Mr. Browning could have saved the 
great scientist from dangerous agnostic tendencies. 

Browning fully believed in the divinity of Christ ; any per¬ 
son who will study his writings as a whole can not well reach 
any other conclusion. In the poems “Christmas Eve” and “Eas¬ 
ter Day” he prays for the Gottingen professor who only believed 
Christ to be a 'mvtli: 

t j 

“May Christ do for him what no mere man shall, 

And stand confessed as the God of salvation!” 

There are many German professors, even at the present 
time, who greatly need the prayers of Browning. Browning 
was fifty-six years old when he published “The Ring and the 
Book,” and no one can well question the fact that lie in this 
work teaches his mature convictions. This work clearly teaches 

IS 

that the poet believed in the divinity of our Lord. “An Epis¬ 
tle of Karshish” also teaches that Browning believed in the 
supernatural work of the Christ; for it teaches the resurrection 
of Lazarus, which was the greatest miracle of Jesus. David, in 
the poem entitled “Saul,” predicted the future, and the poet 
clearly recognizes his prophetic power. 

“O Saul, it shall be 

A face like my face that receives thee; a Man like to me, 

Thou shalt love and be loved, forever; a Hand like this hand 
Shall throw open the gates of new life to thee! See the Christ stand!” 


MACJiOCOSMUS. 


One of Browning’s strongest arguments in favor of the di¬ 
vine origin of Christianity is presented in his poem entitled 
“A Death in the Desert.” The poem is a narrative by one of 
John's disciples who was supposed to witness the death of the 
apostle, and make a record of his last words John looked into 
the future and described the forms of our present-day objec¬ 
tions to Christianity. His argument from the internal evi¬ 
dence of Christianity will convince any person who will give 
sufficient attention to it. The poet admits the necessity of mir¬ 
acles at the origin of Christianity, but he seems to think that 
the internal evidence should be sufficient to convince any intel¬ 
ligent person at the present time. 

“I sav, the acknowledgment of God in Christ, 

Accepted by thy reason, solves for thee 
All questions in the earth and out of it, 
nd has so far advanced thee to be wise.” 

The Incarnation was to Robert Browning the very substance 
of religion; for it was the greatest manifestation of God’s love 
to man. If man will love as God has loved, the earth and the 
heavens will be perfectly united. Love is the fulfilling of the 
law; and we should love God, because he first loved us. Love 
is the golden chain uniting heaven to earth and earth to heaven; 
and when men truly love God, they will obey his command¬ 
ments. 


Book IV. 

IMPORTANT PROBLEMS IN LITERATURE, ART 

AND CIVILIZATION 

CHAPTER I. 

John Ruskin and His Problems. 

John Ruskin, probably the greatest art critic ever born in 
England, was a native of London, and first breathed its smoky 
air Feb. 8, 1819. His father was a prosperous business man, 
and the environment of the boy was the very best. His 
mother has been compared to the mother of Carlyle, who made 
him constantly read the Bible. This Biblical training had an 
important influence upon the style of both these great writers. 

Ruskin’s early training was under private teachers, and 
he also had the early benefit of travel. His father in his busi¬ 
ness tours through Great Britain and France took with him 
both mother and son, and the boy’s love of both nature and 
art was greatly stimulated. He early began to write poetry, 
and continued it until he had gained a prize at Oxford. This 
evidently had much to do in making his prose so thoroughly 
poetical. He early fell in love, and, like most boys who have 
imagination, wrote a poem to his beloved. In fact, poetry is 
one of the very earliest ministers to life and civilization. I 
well remember what a powerful influence the “Psalm of 
Life,” by Longfellow, had upon me when I was a boy. Later 
in life, it was my delight to look at the old, grayheaded poet 
walk up and down the street near Harvard University. Rus¬ 
kin’s “ Praeterita ’ ’ is a highly interesting reminiscence of his 
boyhood days. It was with great pleasure that he contem¬ 
plated the past. 

In 1836, when Ruskin had reached the age of seventeen, he 
entered Christ Church College, Oxford, at the same age that 
John Wesley had entered the same college. It was also the 
college where John Locke was educated. This institution 

327 


328 


MACROCOSMUS 


certainly produced three distinguished Johns. It is interest¬ 
ing to the visitor at Oxford to find the busts of John Locke 
and John Wesley near each other. In 1841, John Ruskin re¬ 
ceived the degree of B.A. at Oxford, and at once went to 
work on his “Modern Painters,” which called the attention 
of the world to his genius. He was a preacher from the be¬ 
ginning, and in this great work he took the paintings of 
Turner for his text. 

Ruskin spent several years in studying art in Italy, and 
these studies soon resulted in the publication of his “Seven 
Lamps of Architecture,” which specially call attention to the 
spirit which should underlie all art, and the “Stones of 
Venice,” which clearly show the relationship of art to both 
religious and national life. He soon became the most noted 
leader in what is called the pre-Raphaelite movement. Ruskin 
strongly emphasized the spirituality of early Christian art, 
and especially the work of Giotto. He doubtless went to ex¬ 
tremes, as he did in the case of Turner; still, he was a voice 
in the wilderness, and had a message that the age greatly 
needed. The Renaissance had its bad points as well as good, 
and Ruskin clearly saw the dangerous tendencies to naturalism 
and sensualism. 

Ruskin was a charitable man, and the fortune left him by 
his father enabled him to exercise this feeling as much as he 
thought proper. He inherited more than half a million dol¬ 
lars, and at his death but little of this was left. He was a 
man of judgment and foresight, and soon learned by experience 
that it was better to help people than practice indiscriminate 
charity. He often declared that he would rather his money 
would be fruitful than simply helpful. 

Our great author was very fond of children. He had none 
of his own. His marriage was unfortunate, and his wife soon 
left him without any fault being attributed to him. Like 
Lowell, he had the most intense love of children, and they 
could at once recognize this fact. In “Praeterita” he men¬ 
tions a number of his child friends. 

In his old age, Ruskin had a very serious breakdown. 
This could, without difficulty, be foreseen, when we consider 
the enormous amount of work he accomplished, and the fact 


JOHN RUSKIN AND HIS PROBLEMS 


329 


that lie once broke down in early life. lie never was a strong 
man, and lived to be over eighty years old. Towards the last 
his intellect was clouded with melancholia, which at times 
amounted to temporary derangement. He lived quietly in the 
country, and when at his best would revise his books, and 
write his biographical sketch, which is found in “ Prseterita. ” 
In 1900 this great Englishman passed into the unseen world. 

JOHN RUSKIN WAS A GREAT ART CRITIC. 

« 

Before one criticizes Buskin as an art critic, he should 
read the five volumes of “Modern Painters,” which have 
done more to revolutionize art than any other modern works. 
No one has done more to counteract materialistic tendencies 
in modern art than has John Buskin. While his books were 
severely criticized at the time they were written, nearly all 
the great artists at the present time fully accept his principles. 
He may have overestimated Turner, but we now find in 
critical journals a strong tendency to recognize Turner as the 
greatest of landscape painters. 

Buskin’s Oxford Lectures on “The Art of England” show, 
not only a critical mind, but a fair and comprehensive one. 
The lecture on “The Bealistic Schools” highly praises both 
D. G. Bossetti and W. Holman Hunt. Of Hunt he says: 
“Whereas Holman Hunt, in the very beginning of his career, 
fixed his mind, as a colorist, on the true representation of sun¬ 
shine, of glowing leafage, of living rock, of heavenly cloud; 
and his long and resolute exile, deeply on many grounds to be 
regretted, both for himself and us, bound only closer to his 
heart the mighty forms and hues of God’s earth and sky, and 
the mysteries of its appointed lights of the day and of the 
night opening on the foam—of desolate seas, insacred—lands 
forlorn.” Our great critic fully recognized the great truths 
held to, and the important works accomplished, by this school. 
He was now old enough to avoid extremes. 

Buskin’s lectures at Oxford on “The Mythic Schools” were 
also of the highest interest. He had long been interested in 
the study of mythology. The following .language fully 
illustrates this fact: “And here I must at once pray you to 
remove all the associations of falsehood from the word 



330 


MACROCOSMUS 


‘romance,’ so also to clear them out of your faith when you 
begin the study of mythology. Never confuse a myth with a 
lie—nay, you must even be cautious how far you even per¬ 
mit it to even be called a fable.” Ruskin insisted that the 
Mythic school should teach the spiritual truths of myths. He 
was well pleased with the works of E. Burne Jones and G. F. 
Watts. Their pictures have souls. 

You can clearly see the eclecticism of Kuskin in his lecture 
at Oxford on “The Classic Schools of Painting.” He greatly re¬ 
gretted the hostility that had long existed between the classic 
and Gothic schools. He declared that there was no ground in 
history, no excuse in the nature of those arts, for such hostility. 
He was a special friend to the classic Sir F. Leighton, and 
also thought well of Alma Tadema. They were both highly 
gifted. The famous Elgin Marbles are no longer seen in 
Greece, but in the British Museum, and it is worth a trip to 
London to see them. Rusk in insisted upon a complete rec¬ 
onciliation between the Gothic and the classic. To him Luca 
della Robbia represented the unity of all art. A three-year- 
old little girl, visiting Ruskin, saw the infant Jesus by Robbia, 
and at once went up and kissed the picture. Mary was kneel¬ 
ing to the divine babe. 

Ruskin greatly admired the Florentine art of the thirteenth 
century, and Giotto he considered the master. The Church of 
Santa Croce, where Michael Angelo was buried, contains the 
greatest works of this celebrated artist. Our critic says: 
“Giotto painted very small pictures and very large—painted 
from the age of twenty to sixty—painted some subjects care¬ 
lessly which he had little interest in—some earefully with all 
his heart.” 

The masterpiece of Giotto was St. Louis. There could have 
been no better subject, for this king was the greatest ruler 
of his day, and the greatest defender of Christendom. Some 
critics think that “The Campanile of the Duomo” was Giotto’s 
greatest work, as at that time he was the greatest painter, 
sculptor and architect in Italy; but it is probable that even 
this does not equal the marvelous painting of St. Louis. 
Ruskin says: “A fresco, life-size, with campanile architecture 
behind it, painted in an important place; and if one might 


JOHN RUSKIN AND HIS PROBLEMS 


331 


choose one s subject, perhaps the most interesting saint of 
all saints, for him to do for us, would be St. Louis.” 

At the time of Giotto the two leading religious orders were 
the Dominicans and Franciscans. The Franciscans began a 
mission in Florence in 1212 A. D., and the Dominicans in 1220 
A. D. The Franciscans were known as the Black Friars, and 
the Dominicans as the White. St. Mary’s was built by the 
Dominicans, and Santa Croce by the Franciscans. Giotto was a 
Franciscan. 


RUSKIN WAS A PHILOSOPHER. 

« 

John Ruskin was a member of the Metaphysical Society, 
and was much interested in its work. The following is 
taken from one of his addresses delivered before this society: 

“Whether, that is to say, we should try to make some men 
beautiful at the cost of ugliness in others, and some men 
virtuous at the cost of vice in others, or, rather, all men beauti¬ 
ful and virtuous to the degree possible to each under a system 
of equitable education. And evidently our first business is 
to consider in what terms the choice is put to us by nature. 
What can we do if we would? What must we do, whether we 
will or not ? How high can we raise the level of diffusing 
learning and morality? And how far shall we be compelled, 
if we limit, to exaggerate the advantage and injuries of our 
system? And are we prepared, if the extremity be inevitable, 
to push to the utmost the relations implied when we take off 
our hats to teach each other, and triple to tiara of the saints 
in heaven, while we leave the sinner bareheaded in Cocytus?” 

Again he says: “It is well, perhaps, that I should at once 
confess myself to hold the principle of limitation in its utmost 
extent; and to entertain no doubt of the rightness of my 
ideal, but only of its feasibility. I am ill at ease, for instance, 
in my uncertainty, whether our greatly regretted chairman 
will ever be Pope, or whether some people I could mention, 
not, of course, members of our society, will ever be in 
Cocytus.” Ruskin was quite a philosopher in his way. 

Our great critic understood aesthetics as few men ever 
have. To a high degree, God placed in his nature the faculty 
of perceiving and feeling the beautiful in both nature and 


332 


MACROCOSMUS 


art. The very image of God in creation is comprehended in 
the sense of beauty. The adjective “beautiful” may be used to 
designate the quality of the object that excites in man the 
emotion of beauty; beauty may be designated as the emotion, 
and the beautiful may be used to represent the intellectual 
antecedent of the emotion of beauty. We must understand in 
the discussion of this subject, as in philosophy, so in art, real¬ 
ism and idealism have gone to extremes in representing rival 
schools. The truth is in the golden mean. Idealism has led 
to mysticism, and realism to sensualism. Both extremes have 
always been deadly foes to art. When art has been most 
successful, the golden mean has been adopted. (See the 
author’s “Cultural’) 

Some eminent critics have taken the position that art’s 
mission is simply to please. I can not agree with these gentle¬ 
men, and must insist that art's true mission is to represent 
life. The first facts of art are to be found in God and crea¬ 
tion. Nature is the expression of the very life of God, and all 
legitimate art is the expression of that which is godlike in 
man and his life. Man is the offspring of God. 

RUSKIN WAS A SOCIAL REFORMER. 

The eighteenth century was thoroughly materialistic, and 
to make money appeared to be the great purpose of life. The 
people were not without religion, but it was largely formalism 
and made to subserve materialistic purposes. Religion was 
made more of fear than of love. This commercial spirit ex¬ 
tended into the nineteenth century, and continues up to the 
present time. Such tendencies necessarily call for prophets, 
and Carlyle and Ruskin appear among the most vigorous. 
They were prophets of social reform. When we come to the 
next division of our subject, I will also show that they were 
great religious prophets. A prophet is one who teaches as 
well as one who predicts. 

Ruskin, in some respects, was a disciple of Carlyle. In 
“Sartor Resartus” Carlyle severely condemns clothes philosophy, 
and in the spirit of the ancient prophet calls on his age to 
reform, and consider man’s true relationship to life. Life is 
more than meat, and the body more than raiment. Ruskin in 


JOHN RUSKIN AND HIS PROBLEMS 


333 


a voice less harsh also rebukes the spirit of his age, and calls 
the people to reformation. 

Ruskin’s lecture on “Fiction, Fair and Foul,” should be 
studied by all persons interested in social reform. He illus¬ 
trates from the influence of cities and writers of fiction. 

JOHN RUSKIN WAS A GREAT STUDENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY. 

His writings on this subject have been a voice in the wilder¬ 
ness which has brought about many changes. While the 
economists of his day were simply emphasizing value in ex¬ 
change, Ruskin showed that man was more valuable than 
money. The wealth of the country should not go to the 
strongest, but there should be a more equitable distribution 
of the products of industry. The welfare of a nation should 
be measured by something higher than money. The people 
should not only have the necessities of life, but favorable en¬ 
vironments to develop the highest susceptibilities of their 
nature. Many of our modern reforms are largely due to the 
high ideals of Ruskin. The American Civic Association and 
the National Municipal League are largely carrying out his 
high ideals 

RUSKIN WAS A RELIGIOUS REFORMER. 

In one of his Oxford lectures, he used the following lan¬ 
guage : “ Of this, and of the rest of these drawings, I have much 
to say to you; but this first and last, that they are representa¬ 
tions of beautiful human nature, such as could only be found 
among people living in the pure Christian faith, such as it 
was, and is, since the twelfth century, and that although, as 
I said, I have returned to Oxford only to teach you technical 
things, this truth must close the first words, and it must be 
the sum of all I may be permitted to speak to you, that the 
history of the art of the Greeks is the eulogy of their virtues; 
and the history of art after the fall of Greece is that of the 
obedience and faith of Christianity.” Ruskin considered art 
injurious to civilization unless it is inspired by high moral 
and spiritual ideals. In his inaugural address at the Cam¬ 
bridge School of Art, he uses the following language: “For¬ 
ever you will see the rude and simple nation at once more vir- 


334 


MACROCOSMUS 


tuous and more victorious than one practiced in the arts. 

% 

Watch how the Lydian is overthrown by the Persian; the 
Persian by the Athenian; the Athenian by the Spartan; then 
the whole polished Greece by the rougher Roman; the Roman 
in his turn refined, only to be crushed by the Goth; and at 
the turning-point of the Middle Ages, the liberty of Europe 
first asserted the virtues of Christianity best practiced, and 
its doctrines best attended, by a handful of mountain shep¬ 
herds, without art, without literature, almost without language, 
yet remaining unconquered amidst Teutonic chivalry, and un¬ 
corrupted amidst the hierarchies of Rome.” 

Ruskin and Tolstoi, the greatest art critics of the nineteenth 
century, reached the conclusion that when the arts are used in 
the service of pleasure only they end in death and dishonor. Rus¬ 
kin says: “This is the great enigma of art history—you must 
not follow art without pleasure, nor must you follow it for 
the sake of pleasure, and the solution of that enigma is simply 
this fact, that, where art has been followed only for the sake 
of luxury and delight, it has contributed, and largely con¬ 
tributed, to bring about the destruction of the nation practic¬ 
ing it; but wherever art has been also used to teach any truth, 
or supposed truth, religious, moral or natural, there it has 
elevated the nation practicing it, and itself with the nation. 
Thus the art of Greece rose, and did service to the people so 
long as it was interpreter to them of the religion they believed 
in. The arts of northern sculpture and architecture rose as 
interpreters of Christian legend and doctrine: the art of 
painting in Italy, not only as religious, but also mainly as 
the expressive truths of moral philosophy and powerful in 
pure human portraiture. The only great painters in our 
schools of painting in England have either been of portrait— 
Reynolds and Gainsborough; of the philosophy of social life— 
Hogarth, or the facts of nature in landscape—Wilson and 
Turner. ’ ’ 


CHAPTER II. 

Thomas Carlyle and His Problems. 

In number four of the quarterly published by the New 
York Academy of Political Science, Columbia University, 
December, 1917, Herbert L. Stewart has an interesting article 
on Carlyle’s conception of history. I have long taken much 
the same view. Carlyle is usually regarded as more of a poet, 
prophet and seer than as a historian. If the historian is the 
man who presents to the present generation a real and critical 
picture of the past, then Thomas Carlyle was one of the very 
greatest historians. His literary and critical ability is of the 
highest order. Carlyle was really one of the founders of the 
philosophy of history. He believed that the higher historian 
should not record the transient and accidental, but the most 
essential and lasting in the progress of civilization. While 
the antiquarian might be interested in the lower, the true his¬ 
torian should concentrate on things that are permanent, and 
although, from time to time, changing the form, are really 
essential in the solving of the problems of all ages. With his 
principles, Carlyle could not otherwise than criticize very 
severely history as it had generally been written. He did not 
hesitate to sharply criticize such historians as Robertson and 
Sir Walter Scott. Robertson’s history of Scotland was mostly 
a scandalous chronicle about Henry Darnley and Mary Stuart. 
Instead of giving a true picture of the Scotch, he uses his 
space in describing the fine legs of Darnley, and the beauty 
of the light-headed Mary. Carlyle says that Scott’s history of 
Scotland was no more a real history than he was Pope of 
Rome. Scott’s novels he looked upon as better history than 
what Scott called his histories. 

Carlyle very largely identified biography and history. 
While an age may be largely described in connection with 
heroes of that age, still this theory may be carried to an ex¬ 
treme. Some may accidentally occupy permanent positions in 
the progress of civilization and receive the praise that belongs 
to the many. The age makes the hero fully as much as the 

335 


MACROCOSMUS 


336 

hero makes the age. The stream of time is continuous, and 
every age greatly depends upon all preceding ages. Carlyle 
says: “Our clock strikes when there is a change from hour to 
hour, but no hammer in the horologe of time peals through 
the universe when there is a change from era to era.' 

Carlyle claims that all social progress largely depends 
upon the periodic appearance of great individuals. It is not 
difficult to see that such must be the case, no difference what 
view we may take. It is just as true when we say that the 
age makes the individual as the individual makes the age. 
Both positions are largely true, and the medium position is 
certainly the correct one. 

Carlyle’s “french revolution.” 

Carlyle’s “French Revolution” is probably the greatest 
work he wrote on history. In it he is comparatively free > 
from his extreme biographical theory of history. The 
French leaders and people of that period are dramatically 
described and pictured as only the great Scotchman could 
hold them up to nature. According to our great author, his¬ 
tory, like other sciences, has its artist and artisan. The 
latter is concerned with some narrow area, like the simple 
husbandman who tills his own plot, putting in his seed and 
reaping his harvest by the rules experience has taught him 
with never a thought of the wondrous relation his farm 
stands to the earth below and the heavens above. He works 
mechanically in a department without eye for the whole, and 
rightly so, for he is a farmer, and not a botanist, still less a 
philosopher or a poet. It is different with the artist. With 
him no fragment of history can be understood without reference 
to all the rest. He constructs the past, not simply piece by 
piece, but as a unity. Even from the historical standpoint, 
Carlyle placed a high estimate upon the Waverlv novels. 
Carlyle’s “French Revolution” is a marvelous work of art, 
and probably comes nearer his highest ideals in reference to 
the philosophic historian than any other work. Tt is probably 
the greatest work in the world from this high standpoint. 

In 1774, Louis XV., who had a long, but inglorious, reign, 
was gradually dying. His father, Louis XIV., was a great ruler, 


THOMAS CARLYLE AND HIS PROBLEMS 337 

but the prince of autocrats. He once declared that he was 
the state. Louis XV., on one occasion, selfishly pronounced 
the state old, but declared it would last his time. Such 
rulers could not well otherwise than bring on a great reaction 
and revolution. Louis XV. greatly feared death. It is not 
surprising when we consider his dissolute life. It was indeed 
a decadent age, and the ship of state was rapidly approach¬ 
ing the breakers. Louis XVI. and his beautiful bride had to 
bear the iniquities of their ancestors. They were greatly 
affected when their heavy responsibilities were communicated 
to them, and on their knees repeated the following prayer: 

God guide and protect us, we are too young to reign.” 

The materialistic and atheistic literature preceding the 
Revolution had much to do in bringing on the great cataclysm. 
When a nation loses faith in God and a future life, it is on 
its way to ruin. Destroy all hope in man, and he soon sinks 
to the level of, if not below, the brute. Carlyle says many im¬ 
portant things in reference to this tendency in France. Woe 
to philosophism that it destroyed religion! Woe to those who 
make the holy an abomination! Infidel tendencies in Germany 
are now showing themselves after the great war. The high 
. spiritual ideals of religion are essential to the progress of 
civilization. 

Religious persecution in France had much to do in bring¬ 
ing on the great Revolution. It practically eliminated the 
middle class, which is very essential to the welfare of any 
country. AVhen one visits Paris, he can not otherwise than 
think of the great barbarities of the St. Bartholomew massa¬ 
cre. When the different incidents connected with it are men¬ 
tioned, the average Frenchman will blush. Even the great 
Louis XIV. drove the best men and women out of France. 
Poor Louis XVI. had to suffer even death itself on account of 
the sins of his ancestors. 

The American Revolution also prepared the way for the 
French Revolution. Lafayette, Tom Paine and many others 
were intimately connected with both Revolutions. Lafayette 
was anxious to establish a government very similar to that of 
the United States. He did not seriously object to a monarchy, 
provided it was a limited monarchy. 


338 


MACROCOSM US 


Felix Gras wrote three volumes on the French Revolu¬ 
tion which are worthy of careful thought. His first work, 
“The Reds of the Medi,” describes the patriots of the south 
who marched to Paris, took part in storming the Bastile and 
in defending the country against foreign invasion. The second 
book, “The Terror,” he devotes to the horrors of Jacobin 
anarchy. This ruinous party determined to annihilate all who 
were opposed to their program. The third, “The White 
Terror,” pictures the crimes committed by the aristocrats when 
they were restored to power. Carlyle condemns in the 
strongest terms the conduct of those belonging to the famous 
Jacobin Club. 

On Jan. 21, 1793, Louis XVI. was executed. Carlyle gives 
a fair estimate of the king: “It is even so, and thou shouldst 
ever know it, 0 haughty, tyrannous man, injustice breeds in¬ 
justice; curses and falsehoods do invariably return, wide as 
they may wander.” Innocent Louis bears the sins of many 
generations; he, too, experiences that man’s tribunal is not in 
this earth; that is, he had no higher one, it were not well 
with him. At home the killing of the king has divided all 
friends and abroad it has united all enemies. Great Britain 
declared war against France. 

On July 13, 1793, Charlotte Corday assassinated the tyrant 
Marat. At her trial she said that she “killed one man to 
save a hundred thousand; a villain, to save innocents; a 
savage wild beast, to give repose to my country.” Our 
author says: “0 ye hapless two, mutually extinctive, the 
beautiful and the squalid, sleep ye well—the mother’s bosom 
that bore you both ! ’ ’ 

On Oct. 14, 1793, Marie Antoinette was executed. Our 
great artist-historian presents -an interesting contrast. 
Twenty-three years before that time the beautiful archduchess, 
at the age of fifteen, left her home in Vienna to be married 
to the heir of the throne of France, apparently the most 
fortunate of women. She is put to death for practically no 
other crime than being the wife of the king of France. It is 
shocking to think of the criminal tendencies in man’s nature. 

The Sansculotts were like Saturn, they would even 
devour their own children. They nearly exterminated the 


THOMAS CARLYLE AND HIS PROBLEMS 


339 


Girondists, who were fully as good republicans as themselves. 
They even murdered Danton, who was their greatest leader, 
because he advocated unity among all patriots in order to 
drive all foreign enemies from the soil of France. The death 
of Danton caused a reaction, which resulted in the execution 
of Robespierre and his associates. 

The anarchists were finally overthrown by grapesliot 
from the cannon of Napoleon Bonaparte. Carlyle shows him¬ 
self a great artist in the way he introduces this distinguished 
character, a young man at Brienne found qualified in mathe¬ 
matics. The name of him is Napoleon Bonaparte. At Toulon 
a young artillery officer ventures that, by seizing a certain 
point, Toulon can be taken. This was done, and Toulon sur¬ 
rendered. This young officer was Napoleon Bonaparte. When 
the convention was besieged by forty thousand anarchists at 
the suggestion of Barras, Napoleon Bonaparte was asked if he 
could defend the convention. He retired thirty minutes and 
returned with the answer “Yea,” and with five thousand men 
and artillery he scattered the entire mob of anarchists, and 
young Bonaparte was unanimously made general of the 
interior. 

“the LIFE OF SCHILLER.” 

Carlyle takes the position that a nation’s part can best be 
known by a careful study of its poetry. He especially makes 
this clear in his work entitled “Historic Survey of German 
Poetry. ’ ’ 

“The Life of Schiller” is one of Carlyle’s greatest works, 
as this great German was the most beloved of the poets of that 
intellectual race. His great qualities are fully illustrated in 
the noble works he has left behind. The world, as well as 
Germany, has enrolled him among that selected number known 
as classic. 

“The Robbers.” This was Schiller’s first book, and its 
democratic tendencies brought down upon him the wrath of 
the rulers of his country. It gives a true picture of the times. 
Our author claims that the publication of this book forms an 
era, not only in the poet’s life, but also in the literature of 
the world. A rude simplicity combined with a gloomy force 


340 


MACROCOSMUS 


are its chief characteristics. Its tragic interest is deep 
throughout, so deep that it frequently borders on horror. 
Karl von Moor is a character to interest young poets, and has 
a force of soul which makes it likewise awful. Amelia is a 
beautiful creation devoted in her love for Moor, and she flits 
before us as if an inhabitant of a higher world. 

“Complicity of Fiesco.” This is an Italian play, and 
made its appearance about three years after “The Robbers.” 
Schiller’s ideas of art had expanded, and his knowledge of life 
had enlarged. Fiesco is a character tragically interesting, and 
his luxurious dissipation softens the rudeness of that strength 
it tends to conceal. Leonora is a beautiful character, and her 
persuasions could melt the heart of her ardent lover. She is 
like unto Amelia, and such a heroine as Schiller delighted to 
draw. She is meek and retiring, but clings to her husband 
as if her very being was one with his. 

“Don Carlos.” This is a historic novel, well suited to 
the drama, and it well represents maturity in this kind of 
work on the part of the poet. The rigid and bigoted court, at 
the close of the sixteenth century, well furnished material for 
just such a work. The king of Spain was ready to murder 
any one opposed to his bigoted views. Elizabeth’s love for 
Don Carlos made him independent and daring as to what 
might be his future. Posa in this play is supposed to repre¬ 
sent Schiller himself, pleading for the general good of human¬ 
ity. Schiller was a true democrat. 

Schiller now forsakes the drama for history. He became 
professor of history at the University of Jena. He was in 
the highest sense a philosophical historian. In 1791 his 
history of the Thirty Years' War was published. The German 
critics consider this work his chief performance in historical 
literature, but Carlyle thinks that “The Revolt of the Nether¬ 
lands” would have been even superior to this, if the author 
could have completed it. These works lifted history to the 
higher plane. 

“Wallenstein.” This tragedy, which was published at the 
close of the eighteenth century, Carlyle considers the greatest 
of the century. He does not think that France rose into the 
sphere of Schiller even in the days of Corneille, nor that 


THOMAS CARLYLE AND HIS PROBLEMS 


341 


Great Britain reached it since the days of Shakespeare. Even 
Faust he thinks a careless effusion compared with Wallenstein. 

“Maria Stuart” and “The Maid of Orleans” are interest¬ 
ing historical dramas, but “William Tell” Carlyle regards 
as one of the very best that Schiller produced. It exhibits 
some of the highest triumphs which his genius, combined with 
his art, ever realized. Carlyle says: “The first descent of 
freedom to our modern world, the first unfolding of her 
standard on the rocky pinnacle of Europe, is here celebrated 
in the style it deserved.” One, visiting Switzerland, feels a 
peculiar inspiration when contemplating the scenes connected 
with William Tell. He breathes the very atmosphere of 
freedom, and appreciates, more and more, the march of 
democracy towards its ultimate triumph and the education of 
the whole human race. 

“HEROES AND HERO WORSHIP.” 

Carlyle takes the position that all things that have been 
accomplished in the world are the practical result of the 
thoughts of great men; the soul of the whole world’s history 
has been the thoughts and actions of these heroes. This posi¬ 
tion contains much truth, but it is an extreme. Our author 
boldly declares that the history of the world is the biography 
of great men. He says: “From Norse Odin to English 
Samuel Johnson, from the divine founder of Christianity to 
the withered pontiff encyclopedism, in all times and places, 

the hero has been worshiped.” 

Dante and Shakespeare are made to represent the hero 
as a poet. Poet and prophet are much the same. They both 
penetrate into the sacred mystery of the universe, with 
Goethe the open secret which is open to all, but seen by 
almost none. It is that mystery which lies everywhere in all 
beings, the divine idea of the world, that which lies at the 
bottom of appearance; as Fichte styles it, of which all appear¬ 
ance from the starry sky to the grass of the field, but 
especially the appearance of man and his work, is but the 
vesture, the embodiment that renders it visible. 

Our great author selects Samuel Johnson, Rousseau and 
Burns to represent the hero as a man of letters. This hero 


342 


MACROCOSMUS 


discharges a function which is ever honorable, even the high¬ 
est. This hero lives in the inward sphere of things, in the true 
divine and eternal, which exists always unseen to most, under 
the temporary trivial, his being is in that he declares that a 
broad, by act or speech as it may be, in declaring himself 
abroad. His life is a piece of the everlasting heart of nature 
herself. The man of letters, like every hero, is to proclaim 
this the best he can, and truly be a hero in the strife. 

11 FREDERICK THE GREAT.” 

This colossal biography is one of the very greatest in the 
history of literature. It fully represents Carlyle’s theory of 
history, and shows a genius fully equal to the greatest classic 
historians. Emerson pronounced it the wittiest book in the 
world. The author very carefully compared the great heroic 
leaders of the world, and finally settled on Frederick the 
Great as the most suitable one with whom to illustrate his 
theme. 

The spirit Frederick manifested towards his father, who 
was harsh in the extreme, truly shows a very high character. 
The two were fully reconciled before the death of the 
father, and the old man showed the greatest affection for his 
son. Frederick truly loved his mother, and manifested the 
greatest grief at her death. He and his sister Wilhelmina 
were much devoted to each other, and he truly mourned her 
death. Frederick did not love war, but had to defend Europe 
and the Protestant cause against the combination of the 
fanatical queen of Austria. He was the champion of liberty 
and civilization. In the Seven Years’ War, he and Great 
Britain were allies against the rest of Europe. When one 
stands at the grave of Frederick, he instinctively feels that a 
great light of history is here represented. Napoleon said: 
“If you were alive, I would not be here.” Since his day 
Prussia has certainly fallen. 

“past and present.” 

This is one of Carlyle’s greatest and most interesting books. 
While Book One, entitled “Proem,” has many great lessons. 
Book Two, “The Ancient Monk,” is a masterpiece, and it will 


THOMAS CARLYLE AND HIS PROBLEMS 


343 


live as long as any of Carlyle’s books. Abbot Samson and the 
St. Edmundsbury monks are pen-pictures of the highest order. 
Here our author shows himself to be a great artist. 

Seldom has a people been more graphically described than 
Carlyle describes the English. With all his theoretic plati¬ 
tudes, John Bull is noted for his common sense. He universal¬ 
ly shows justice and courage under the most trying circum¬ 
stances. Of all nations the English appear to be the wisest in 
action, although they may be stupid in speech. Whatever may 
be said of their stupidness, their great possibilities are certain¬ 
ly shown in Milton and Shakespeare. 

Carlyle did much to present Cromwell in his true light. He 
insisted that Cromwell was the greatest ruler England had 
produced in five hundred years. He also looked upon the 
great Protector as perfectly sincere, and contrasted him with 
Sir Jabesh Windbag. Cromwell developed the greatest ele¬ 
ments in English character, and laid the foundations of the 
greatest empire in the history of the world. The voice of 
God was in the Puritan movement, and the English Empire 
has civilized nearly one-half of the whole world. 


CHAPTER III. 

Victor Hugo and His Problems. 

In his writings, Victor Hugo throws important light on all 
the great problems of the world. In three of his books are 
discussed all the great problems of the day. In “Notre Dame 
de Paris, ’ ’ we find represented the religious problems; in 
“Les Miserables,'’ the social problems, and in “The Toilers of 
the Sea,’’ the intense activities of man. 

VICTOR HUGO AS A POET. 

In his early works our great author belonged to the Classic 
school, but when he reached maturity he found himself at the 
head of the Romantic school. In 1817 young Victor competed 
for the Academy prize for French poetry, and was so en¬ 
couraged by the authorities that he resolved to spend his life 
as an author. He has properly been called the Shakespeare 
of the French, and above all other things he was a poet. In 
fact, you find poetry and the poetic element in nearly every¬ 
thing he wrote. “Autumn Leaves,” “Songs of the Twilight,” 
“Inner Voices,” “Sunbeams and Shadows,” comprise four 
volumes of Hugo’s lyrics, so rich and radiant and of beauty so 
profound, that they received almost universal homage. They 
were also of the highest educational value. His ode to Napo¬ 
leon also attracted much attention. The volume called “Orient- 
ales” was greatly admired by all lovers of high poetry, and it 
was indeed a superb book. Victor’s muse had scarcely spoken 
since the burial of the great Napoleon in 1840, but in 1853 
the volume called “Les Chatiments” sang of the treachery 
of Napoleon III., and never was a man more thoroughly 
castigated. The book has been called terrible, but chastise¬ 
ments were not too severe for Napoleon the Little. In 1856, 
Victor Hugo brought out his interesting volume of poetry 
entitled “Les Contemplations.” It is a great, but sad, book. 
The poet had lost his elder daughter, who, with her husband, 
had been drowned in the Seine. In 1859 the first part of 
Hugo’s greatest work, strictly from the poetic standpoint, 

344 




VICTOR HUGO AND HIS PROBLEMS 


345 


was published. It is named “Legend des Sides”—“Legend 
of the Ages. In the highest poetic style it pictures the 
greatest events and works of the ages. It was a great surprise, 
as well as a revelation, to the literary world. The subject 
was in harmony with the genius of the poet, and the French 
Alexandrine becomes as well suited to his touch as our own 
blank verse to our greatest poets. The remarkable thing about 
this work is the fact that Victor Hugo, who completed the 
last part a short time before his death, showed the same genius 
and vigor as that displayed in the middle of manhood. The 
sublimity of our great poet in this work may be compared to 
Milton in his greatest work, or to the Book of Job. 

VICTOR HUGO AS A DRAMATIST. 

In 1827, Victor Hugo produced “Cromwell,” his first 
drama of note. The Romantic movement might be dated at 
the time Hugo published his preface to “Cromwell.” The 
style was aggressive, and the time was opportune. It summoned 
the Romanticists to arms and conquest, and Victor Hugo 
found himself at the head of the great movement, and soon 
became the Shakespeare of the French. He declared that the 
ode sang of eternity, the epic solemnized history, and the drama 
painted life. It appears that the preface was the greatest part 
of “Cromwell.” Our author is hardly, true to history when he 
makes the desire to become king the chief purpose of his 
life. While Cromwell could have become king, he never really 
accepted that title. Still, it is a great drama after all, and 
did much to advance the poetical drama in France. It is 
sufficient in itself to have given the author lasting fame. It 
was not long until Hugo was recognized to be the equal of 
Moliere. In 1830 “Hermani” appeared, and brought on a 
fearful battle between the Classicists and Romanticists, but 
Hugo won the day. The French tragic stage was liberated and 
transfigured. “Marion de Lorme,” a romantic drama, had 
been prohibited by the Government in 1829, on account of a 
criticism in the fourth act of Louis XIII. Hugo’s plume 
stood out like that of Henry of Navarre at Ivry. It is said 
that Sarah Bernhardt played the part of “Dona Sol” in “Her¬ 
mani.” “Marie Tudor” is an interesting drama by a great 


346 


MACROCOSMUS 


author. Mr. Froude has with great skill described the bloody 
Mary, and Hugo pictures her virtuous character in a dark light 
and narrow mind ruinous in its tendency. Her bigoted creed 
caused her to commit the greatest crimes. Mary was not 
really the paramour of any man. It is not right, even in the 
greatest artists, to pervert the facts of history. This is a special 
fault in nearly all historic dramas. It is better not to use a 
real name at all than to misrepresent the facts. “Torque- 
mada” was* the last great tragic drama written by Victor 
Hugo. It appeared only a short time before his death. It is 
one of our great author’s masterpieces, and showed the marvel¬ 
ous powers of his intellect after he had passed the age of 
eighty. The conscience of the great inquisitor caused him to 
torment the bodies of his victims in order to save their souls. 
The great dramatist almost renders this terrible character 
sublime. 

VICTOR HUGO AS A NOVELIST. 

“Han d’Island,” Hugo’s first novel, was published in 1823. 
It made him many friends, and his pension was increased. 
The author claimed that Scott's novels were picturesque, but 
prosaic. The new style of novel should be dramatic and epic, 
as well as picturesque. It should be Walter Scott grafted into 
Homer. In 1831 “Notre Dame de Paris” was published, and 
greatly added to the fame of Victor Hugo. It occupies the 
same period of time as Walter Scott’s “Quintin Durward.” 
They are both great novels, and each shows the national 
characteristics of the country of its author. Scott shows con¬ 
summate art, but avoids causing unnecessary pain. The 
French will tolerate more suffering in fiction. Hugo’s book 
is great, but also terrible on account of so much crime and so 
many executions. Esmeralda is too pure and tender to 
have such cruel treatment and such a terrible end. The pure 
should be protected. 

“Les Miserables” was published in 1862. It is one of the 
greatest novels ever written, and has had a world-wide influence 
in the elevation of society. It is a great preacher of righteous¬ 
ness. It has been compared to a Gothic cathedral, and has an 

> 

important mission to the whole world. It contains the finest 
description of the battle of Waterloo ever written. Jean Val- 


VICTOR HUGO AND HIS PROBLEMS 


347 


jean is one of the most interesting characters to be found in 
literature. The book has an important message for all social 
reformers. “Les Travailleurs de la Mer” came to light in 
1866. This is a great book for the student of nature and the 
student of man. It shows the wonderful powers of man in 
overcoming the great forces of nature. “Gilliatt” and “De- 
’ruchette ’ ’ are the principal characters. ‘ ‘ Gilliatt ;” not only shows 
his powers over nature, but also knows how to manage himself 
under trying circumstances. He showed himself to be one of 
the most unselfish of mortals. He sought happiness for the 
fickle girl and arranged for her to marry the man of her 
choice. He even sacrificed himself upon the altar of love. 

HUGO AS 4 PHILOSOPHER. 

We find, in the works of Hugo, his philosophy of life very 
much as we. find the same thing in the writings of Shakespeare. 
In fact, in 1864 Victor Hugo wrote a work entitled “ William 
Shakespeare.” He appears to have almost transferred Shake¬ 
speare to his own century; and, in fact, Shakespeare belongs to 
all time and to all culture. Hugo had reached the conclusion 
that the poet’s mission was the highest in the world, and he 
should be the prophet of the highest spiritual ideals. Hugo’s 
social philosophy is also an interesting study. Like Dante, he 
idealized a woman as being able to lead him to the highest 
planes of thought and life. It is unfortunate that this woman 
was not his own wife. In “Le Roi S’ a muse” and “Lucrece 
Borgia,” we find some important thoughts on Hugo’s social phi¬ 
losophy. He claims that a wicked and repulsive man, when he 
becomes a father, is apt to change his life, and that a very 
wicked woman, when she becomes a mother, is apt to be trans¬ 
formed. There is doubtless much in this, but it can certainly 
be carried too far. The responsibility of fatherhood and mother¬ 
hood, and, in fact, any important responsibility, has an impor¬ 
tant influence in the elevation of both men and women. All 
social reform workers must recognize this fact. 

VICTOR HUGO AS A HISTORIAN. 

While Hugo’s historical dramas and novels clearly show 
that he was a great student of history, he actually wrote some 


348 


MACROCOSMUS 


very important historical works. “Historie d’un Crime ” and 
“Napoleon le Petit” are masterpieces. Hugo was a great 
patriot as well as great author, and he did not fear the legions 
of the usurper. The pen showed that it was more powerful 
than the sword, and it has forever rendered the name of 

Napoleon III. infamous. “Napoleon le Petit” is the greatest 

* 

piece of invective to be found in literature, and it did much 
towards the overthrow of the tyrant. 

VICTOR HUGO AND POLITICS. 

Victor Hugo was born in 1802, when his father was a general 
in the army of Napoleon. The son became a great admirer 
of the great Napoleon, and when Bonaparte’s body was re¬ 
moved from St. Helena to Paris, he wrote a great poem. In 
fact, he called Louis Napoleon “Napoleon the Little” in con¬ 
trast with the greatness of his uncle. Hugo was a royalist for 
a number of years. He received the cross of the Legion of 
Honour and became a member of the French Academy. He 
was also made a senator. His views changed about 1830, and 
he approved of the revolution which drove Charles X. from 
the throne of France. He also used his influence in overthrow¬ 
ing the government of Louis Philippe in 1848. He supported 
Napoleon III. for the presidency, as it was understood that 
this candidate was the greatest republican in Europe. The 
conduct of Louis Napoleon tended to make Victor Hugo a 
democrat of a somewhat extreme type. After the establish¬ 
ment of the third republic, he returned from his exile to 
France, and was greatly honored. In 1876 he was again 
elected to the Senate. He died in 1885, and his great public 
funeral has been compared to that of the first Napoleon. 

THE RELIGIOUS VIEWS OF VICTOR HUGO. 

LTntil middle life, Victor Hugo was a monarchist and 
Roman Catholic, but during the last thirty years of his life 
he was democratic and anti-clerical. Garibaldi, who was 
bitterly opposed to the Papacy, was his friend. Hugo finally 
looked upon kings and priests as the pests of mankind. In 
1834, Victor Hugo made a strong plea for religion and the 
gospel. He said: “Sow the villages with the gospel.” “Let 


VICTOR HUGO AND HIS PROBLEMS 


349 


there be a Bible in every liut!” “Jesus had better lore to 
teach than Voltaire.” 1 do not know that Hugo ever greatly 
departed from this teaching. It is true that he wrote against 
Papal tyranny, but he never gave up the fundamental princi¬ 
ples of Christianity. In “Le Cimetiere d’Eyleau, ” where we 
find some of the poet’s best lines, he seems to assume some¬ 
what the role of a prophet. In “Le Pape” the poet-prophet 
has a real pope dream, a dream in which he delivered the 
poet’s philosophy to whomsoever will receive it. In “Re¬ 
ligions et Religion” the poet-prophet preaches a pure theism, 
whose solstice is conscience, whose axis is justice, whose equi¬ 
nox is equality, and whose sunrise is liberty. In “L’Ane” 
a learned ass explains to Kant that human knowledge is futile, 
and that even evil things are working for good. When he was 
dying, our great author declared that he believed in God, and 
asked for a prayer from every human soul. His body reposes 
in the Pantheon. In 1907 the author visited his tomb. 















































* 


























Book V. 

PROBLEMS OF THE UNIVERSITY AND 

RATIONALISM. 

CHAPTER I. 

Problems of the University and Civilization. 

Universities were organized in Italy in the early part of 
the twelfth century, of which Bologna and Salerno were the 
first. These, as well as most European universities, originated 
in schools which had acquired great reputation in particular 
branches of instruction. It seems that Bologna had main¬ 
tained such a school of law from the early part of the eleventh 
century; and in the beginning of the twelfth, its professors 
were often called upon to decide great legal questions by the 
different European rulers. Thus its influence upon the civiliza¬ 
tion of that age could not otherwise than be great. Its in¬ 
fluence was still further increased from the fact that it 
attracted students from all parts of Europe. Salerno accom¬ 
plished much the same thing for the science of medicine as 
Bologna accomplished for the science of law. These universi¬ 
ties were two great lights shining upon the continent of 
Europe. Their democratic character also had a powerful in¬ 
fluence upon society. We spent about one hour in Bologna 
in 1907. 

It appears that many of the universities of Italy, such as 
Modena, Reggio, Padua, had their origin independently of 
both the Papal and the civil authority. This was probably 
true of a large majority of the early universities, but it was 
not true of all of them. For example, the University of 
Naples was established entirely under the direction of the 
Emperor Frederick II. Frederick founded this institution 
in 1225 A. D., as a school of theology, law, medicine and 
the arts. It was a great state university, and was designed 
to keep the students of Naples at home, and not have them 

351 


352 


MACROCOSMUS 


wander over Europe to the different universities. Its in¬ 
fluence was much the same as the state universities of the 
present day, and it did much for higher learning in Italy. 
In the last half of the thirteenth century, the celebrated 
Thomas Aquinas became one of its teachers in theology. The 
University of Rome was founded by Pope Boniface VIII., in 
1303 A. I). This is the pope whom Dante placed in the 
Inferno. The pope, however, had a good purpose in establish¬ 
ing this university, for he intended it especially for the bene¬ 
fit of the poor foreign students who lived in the capital. It, 
for a time, was very prosperous, and had all the faculties, but 
it was injured by Pope John XVII., who would not permit it 
to confer any degrees except in civil and canon law. It, 
however, continued its existence, and under Leo X., in 1514 
A. D., it had about eighty professors. The University of 
Florence was another one of the great Italian universities of 
the fourteenth century, and, for a time, it was one of the 
most distinguished institutions of Europe, and Charles IV. 
granted it special imperial favors. It employed a number of 
the most distinguished teachers of the age. Finally this noted 
institution was destroyed by the tyrant Lorenzo de Medici, 
who no longer wanted it, and its students were removed to 
Pisa. We thus see that Italy was the pioneer of learning in 
modern Europe. 

There was a great educational revival in France during the 
reign of Charles the Great, and some claim that the University 
of Paris then took its origin, but this is extremely doubtful. 
It may be that this influence never fully died out, and in this 
sense it had some relationship to the origin of the University 
of Paris. There were at least three causes for the early origin 
of the University of Paris: 1. The development and consoli¬ 
dation of the French nation. 2. The revival of literature. 3. 
New studies introduced on account of this revival. The belief 
that a knowledge of religious truth is acquired through a 
correct method of reasoning made dialectics the most impor¬ 
tant study in the early universities. Such was the case in the 
University of Paris. The great controversy between Anselm 
and Roscellinus made still more prominent this study, and it 
tended towards the progress of university education. In the 


PROBLEMS OF THE UNIVERSITY AND CIVILIZATION 


353 


early part of the twelfth century, William of Champeaux 
opened a school for advanced study in dialectics; his work 
met with the greatest success. Even Abelard was one of his 
students. The university especially grew out of the schools 
attached to the cathedral on file de la Cite, and presided over 
by the chancellor. The University of Paris was not only the 
model university for France, but also for the great majority 
of the universities of central Europe, as well as for Oxford 
and Cambridge in England. It was really the mother of 
universities. It was in this institution that the degrees of A.B. 
and A.M. took their origin. Master of Arts, at first, meant 
nothing more than the candidate’s entrance upon the functions 
of a teacher. He received the master’s cap, made a speech, 
and took his seat among his brethren, in his master’s chair. 
It was not until the early part of the thirteenth century that 
the university became a legal corporation, and had the right 
to sue and be sued. The university was early divided into 
four Faculties—the Faculty of arts, the Faculty of law, the 
Faculty of medicine and the Faculty of theology. Each 
Faculty was presided over by a dean. While the studies of 
the University of Bologna were entirely professional, those 
in Paris were more designated for the highest mental train¬ 
ing. It is not, therefore, surprising that the University of 
Paris acquired a European reputation, and became, at one 
time, the most noted institution in the world. Students 
flocked to Paris from all European countries, and the influence 
of its great university, in advancing culture and civilization, 
was most powerful. The University of Paris underwent many 
vicissitudes, on account of the political changes in France, 
and was finally succeeded by the University of France. This 
institution comprehends all the great centers of university 
work under state control. Higher education in France has 
been greatly modernized. The University of Paris has again 
been restored. 

The University of Paris was the model for the early Ger¬ 
man universities. The first of these was the University of 
Prague. This institution became great, for it enjoyed the 
same privileges as the Universities of Paris and Bologna. At 
one time, it had thirty thousand students. It is not difficult 


354 


MACROCOSM US 


to sec how powerful their influence must have been on the 
civilization of Europe. While the attendance of this institu¬ 
tion was doubtless overestimated, it is certain that before the 
organization of the University of Leipsic it was more largely 
attended than any other university in Europe. The University 
of Vienna was founded at an early date, and its influence on 
the civilization of Europe has been great. Even to this day, 
it is considered one of the greatest medical centers in the 
world. The University of Erfurt was also one of the earliest 
of German universities. It was a center of influence of the 
Franciscan order, and consequently favorable to reform. At 
this institution Martin Luther received his degrees. In the 
fifteenth century, it had a larger number of students than any 
other German university. The University of Leipsic largely 
owed its origin to a trouble in the University of Prague, 
which resulted in the entire German element emigrating to 
Leipsic. This became one of the great universities of Europe, 
and is now, next to Berlin, the greatest. The University of 
Tubingen was founded in 1476. It had a hard struggle for 
many years, but finally became great. In the nineteenth cen¬ 
tury, it became the center of rationalistic theology. The 
University of Wittenberg was founded by Frederick the Wise. 
At its commencement, it probably attracted as much attention 
as any other university on the Continent. It espoused the 
cause of the Reformation, and Martin Luther was one of its 
distinguished professors. The German universities became 
especially noted in the nineteenth century, which reputation 
largely continues up to the present time. The World War 
has, however, injured them. The University of Berlin was 
founded in 1809, soon after the peace of Tilsit, when Prussia 
had been very greatly humiliated by Napoleon. Its early 
destiny was guided by the celebrated Wilhelm von Humboldt, 
who adopted principles which not only made it one of the- 
very greatest universities in Europe, but its influence was 
also great in the regeneration of Germany. At the beginning 
the University of Berlin proclaimed complete liberty, so far 
as any political or religious creed was concerned, and the 
business of its professors was to seek and teach the truth in 
every department of culture. The result was that it secured, 


PROBLEMS OP THE UNIVERSITY AND CIVILIZATION 


355 

as lecturers and professors, the greatest thinkers and scholars 
in Europe. Wolf, Eichte and Hegel were members of its 
Faculty. The University of Bonn was founded in 1818. It is 
distinguished in both philosophy and theology. It is noted 
for its combination of opposite creeds, the Lutheran and 
Roman Catholic schools working side by side with complete 
success. 

The University of Oxford, England, was one of the first 
modeled after the University of Paris, and the origin of the 
two institutions was very similar. Towards the close of the 
twelfth century, the institution had made considerable progress. 
In the thirteenth century, the following colleges were founded 
at Oxford: Ballial, Merton and University College. Merton 
College was the only one, at that time, which stood for the 
training of the secular clergy, all the rest representing some 
of the religious orders. While Cambridge was established 
later than Oxford, it probably took its origin in the same cen¬ 
tury. Like Oxford, it largely owed its success to the founda¬ 
tion of colleges. These colleges were largely for the benefit of 
the secular clergy. Both universities were much influenced by 
the Reformation, and especially by the Puritan movement. 
In the seventeenth century, Cambridge was greatly influenced 
by the Cartesian philosophy and the Platonic movement. It 
took hold of the new science, and Sir Isaac Newton was one 
of its professors. The new scientific movement caused Cam¬ 
bridge to become especially noted for mathematics. Even to 
this day Oxford is more noted for the classics, and Cambridge 
for the sciences. Near the middle of the nineteenth century, 
all religious tests were removed, and since then the universi¬ 
ties have made great progress. Ex-President White, of Cor¬ 
nell University, thought that as thus reformed the English 
universities will, in many respects, go beyond the German uni¬ 
versities. The influence of Oxford and Cambridge on English 
civilization would certainly be hard to estimate. A very 
large number of those who have made English history 
were educated at one of these great universities. They have 
been the bulwarks of both Church and State, and, consequently, 
at the foundation of a civilization which has filled the world. 
The University of London was founded in 1825 by Thomas 


356 


MACROCOSM US 


Campbell, the poet, in conjunction with Lord Brougham and 
other distinguished men. Its purpose, in the main, was for 
the benefit of Dissenters, who were excluded from the older 
universities. It was strictly non-sectarian, and had on its 
council men of all denominations. On its first council the 
following are among the distinguished names that appear: 
Zacharay Macaulay, James Mill, George Grote, Lord John 
Russell and others of almost equal note. The University of 
, London gives more attention to scientific subjects than the 
older institutions, and it has had among its examiners the 
most distinguished scientists of Great Britain. It began, not 
as a teaching, but only an examining, body, and we may say 
that in some way all the institutions of the British Empire 
are affiliated with it. Its degrees stand higher than those of 
any other institution in Europe. It has greatly influenced 
English culture. It has now become also a teaching body, 
and probably has more students than any other university 
in the world. 

St. Andrew’s, founded in 1411, was the first Scottish uni¬ 
versity. It was modeled after the University of Paris, and 
soon acquired three colleges. This institution largely accepted 
the principles of the Reformation; and, in fact, became one 
of its strongholds. The University of Glasgow was founded 
in 1453, and possessed two colleges. It did not, however, 
acquire much reputation until after the Reformation. It is 
now one of the very greatest of Scotch universities. The 
University of Aberdeen was founded in 1494, and possessed one 
college. The universities of Europe were largely modeled 
after one type, and greatly lacked in discipline. Aberdeen 
made a great improvement in that respect, and was the first 
institution to start in this line of reform. It is yet one of the 
great Scotch universities. The College of Edinburgh, out of 
which grew the university, was founded by a charter from 
James VI., in 1582. It was comparatively free from the tradi¬ 
tions of scholasticism, and its progressive nature caused some 
of the older institutions to oppose it. Like the great English 
universities, the Scottish universities underwent a remodeling 
in 1858, which was a great blessing to all, and especially to 
the University of Edinburgh. Since then, it has made most 


PROBLEMS OF THE UNIVERSITY AND CIVILIZATION 


357 


wonderful progress, and it is now considered one of the great¬ 
est universities in the world. Its medical department, especial¬ 
ly, has a world-wide reputation. Mr. Andrew Carnegie has 
given the Scottish universities several millions of dollars, and 
this will enable them to do even more than they have in the 
past to advance culture in that country, which is probably 
the best educated in the world. 

We have given sufficient to show the evolution or origin 
of the great universities of Europe, but there are a few uni¬ 
versities in countries not mentioned to which we will briefly 
call attention. The Dutch universities were founded in the 
interest of the Protestant cause. The University of Leyden 
was founded in 1575, in commemoration of the successful 
defense of the city against the Spanish. This institution was 
especially noted during the seventeenth century. The Uni¬ 
versity of Brussels, founded in 1834, is quite a prosperous 
institution. The University of Amsterdam was not founded 
until 1877, but it has made commendable progress. The 
University of Madrid is probably the only university of 
Spain that is making much progress. Russia has seven or 
eight universities that are doing quite well. That of Moscow, 
the oldest, is largely attended. The University of Athens 
was founded in 1837, after the pattern of North German 
universities. It has the four Faculties of philosophy, the¬ 
ology, medicine and law. It is a well-equipped institution, 
and has made rather remarkable progress under the circum¬ 
stances. May it restore many of the glories of ancient 
Greece. 

The university in America is indeed an interesting study. 
The leading Puritans of New England had been educated 
at the English universities, and were the first advocates of 
similar institutions in America. Harvard College was 
founded in 1636, only sixteen years after the Puiitans 
landed on the bleak New England coast. In 1700, Yale 
College was founded, and, like Harvard, it had a gradual 
growth. Princeton, Columbia, William and Mary, and other 
colleges, soon followed. All these institutions are to this day 
in a flourishing condition, and Harvard is the greatest uni¬ 
versity in America. The State of New York has more large 


358 


MACROCOSM US 




colleges and universities than any other State. As President 
Eliot, of Harvard, says, its system is doubtless the best. 
New York has no State university, for the regents of the 
University of the State of New York are only an examin¬ 
ing board, and they control all the chartered institutions of 
the State. No colleges or universities can confer a degree 
without their sanction. This system began soon after the 
Revolutionary War, and it has had an interesting evolution. 
It is probable that no system in the world is superior to that 
of the State of New York. New York has ten or twelve 
strong colleges and universities; three of its universities— 
Columbia, Cornell and Syracuse—are among the very largest 
institutions in the United States. 

The University of Pennsylvania was early founded under 
the influence of Benjamin Franklin, and it still continues to 
be one of the leading American universities. It is an en¬ 
dowed institution, and, strictly speaking, not a State univer¬ 
sity. All the early institutions in America were modeled 
after the English universities. The University of Virginia 
was established through the influence of Thomas Jefferson, 
and it was modeled after the French pattern. France, at 
that time, had a great influence in America. Transylvania 
University was the first college established west of the 
Alleghany Mountains. Since that time the great State uni¬ 
versities of the West have been established, and they are 
rapidly becoming a great power in the progress of higher 
education. There is also another class of universities, 
which are having a very powerful influence upon the culture 
of America. These institutions have been established by 
very rich individuals. Among the greatest of this class of 
universities - might be mentioned Johns Hopkins, Cornell, 
Leland Stanford, Jr., and the University of Chicago. Dur¬ 
ing the last half of the nineteenth century, and up to the 
present time, the German universities have had a powerful 
influence upon higher education in America. The World 
War has largely changed this. Canada has made commend¬ 
able progress in higher education. McGill University, the 
University of Toronto and others are among our greatest 
American institutions. 


PROBLEMS OF THE UNIVERSITY AND CIVILIZATION 


359 


The early universities of Italy and France were closely 
1 elated to the Renaissance and the revival of learning. They 
represented the highest culture at that time, and in what 
they did teach they were probably as thorough as the univer¬ 
sities at the present time. We find no such Latin scholars 
at this time equal to those produced by the early univer¬ 
sities. There are not now many scholars who could com¬ 
pose books in Latin as they did. Their great influence on 
civilization is shown in the fact that they attracted students 
from all parts of the civilized world. France, at this time, 
is making more progress in higher education than she has 
made in centuries. 

The German universities are doing more for civilization 
than any other agency in the great empire, and now a re¬ 
public. In fact, they lead all educational work in Germany. 
They are little republics in the midst of a great republic. 
They insist upon complete liberty of thought, and it is diffi¬ 
cult for the Government to resist their position. In some 
cases, the Government has tried to do so, especially in the 
case of Socialism, but it has not met, even here, with com¬ 
plete success. The success of the university is absolutely 
necessary to make the German nation what it aspires to be, 
and to check forever the centralizing tendency of the 
Ilohenzollerns. German liberty largely depends upon the 
universities. The republic looks hopeful. 

The universities of England have been the strongest 
agency in making that country the center of the largest and 
greatest empire the world has ever known. They have 
educated men to be the leaders of civilization in all parts of 
the world, and now the sun never sets upon the dominions 
of the English sovereign. Oxford and Cambridge have been 
the centers of a civilizing influence that has reached all 
races. These great institutions are now making an effort 
to reach all the people, and they are the pioneers in univer¬ 
sity extension work. The London University, the Victorian 
University and others are rapidly becoming the centers of 
culture and civilization. No country in the world has pro¬ 
duced more pioneers in a progressive civilization than has 
England. 


360 


MACROCOSM US 


Probably, taken as a whole, the Scotch nation is the best 
educated in the world, and this is largely due to her uni¬ 
versities. They have reached all classes, and have con¬ 
sequently educated the whole nation. They were the great 
centers of thought and liberty at the time of the Reforma¬ 
tion, and they have made very important contributions to the 
culture of the western world. Many of the sons of Scotch 
universities became the leading preachers and teachers in the 
United States of America. Protestant civilization certainly 
owes much to the influence and work of the Scottish univer¬ 
sities. It is certainly encouraging to progress to know that 
these institutions are now better prepared to do good than 
ever before. 

The American university has done much for western 
civilization. Our early colleges, like the English and Ger¬ 
man, were dominated by religion; after the Revolutionary 
War the political influence was uppermost, and at the pres¬ 
ent time they are distinctly humanitarian. Harvard and 
Yale might be compared to Oxford and Cambridge. Oxford 
was more literary, and Cambridge more scientific; the same 
thing can be said of Harvard and Yale, until one-quarter of 
a century ago. Harvard, during the nineteenth century, 
fostered three important movements. During the first 
quarter of the century, it was the center of the Unitarian 
movement, and then it did not have as many students as 
Yale. In fact, it was considered a Unitarian institution, 
and, from that time to this, all its presidents have been 
Unitarians. Near the middle of the century, it Avas the cen¬ 
ter of Transcendentalism, of which movement Emerson was 
the leader. Under the presidency of Dr. Eliot, Harvard has 
been the leader of the new education, and it has become 
national in its influence. Its progressive tendency has made 
Yale conservative. Science , the organ of the American 
Association for the Advancement of Science, compared twenty 
of the American universities, and I was somewhat surprised 
to find that Columbia, Cornell and Syracuse Universities, all 
in the State of New York, have as many students as Harvard, 
Yale and Princeton. 


PROBLEMS OF THE UNIVERSITY AND CIVILIZATION 361 

The nineteenth century has transferred a number of im¬ 
portant university problems to the twentieth century. The re¬ 
lation of the high school to the college, and the college to the 
professional school, are important problems for our age. 
The high school wants to take one year off of the college course, 
and the professional school wants to take another. This can 
not be permitted without destroying the College of Liberal 
Arts. With our elective system, the Senior year of the col¬ 
lege can do much to prepare the student directly for his pro¬ 
fessional course, but this is all the college can afford to sur¬ 
render. Even the elective system is a problem. I believe in 
it with proper restrictions, but it has been greatly abused, and 
students have sought courses where there was the least resis¬ 
tance. Co-education is being opposed by some leading institu¬ 
tions, but our State universities will settle this question. In 
the very nature of State institutions, young women can not be 
excluded. The relation of the professional school to the uni¬ 
versity is indeed a problem, but I fully believe that all pro¬ 
fessional schools should be parts of the university. “What can 
the university do with religion?” is one of our most difficult 
problems. The university should teach religion, but not 
sectarianism; it should teach it as it does politics. It should 
not be sectarian in either religion or politics. 

The report of Henry E. Armstrong, Ph.D., LL.D., F.R.S., 
of the Mosely Educational Commission, shows the tenden¬ 
cies in university education in America and Great Britain: 
“Even if it were necessary, it would be difficult to arrive at 
any consistent definition of the American college, but as a 
rule it may be said to give a liberal education rather than 
professional training. Where colleges and schools for both 
purposes exist, side by side, they together constitute the uni¬ 
versity. It is noteworthy, with a few exceptions, the term 
‘ university* has only met with general application; Yale Col¬ 
lege, for example, obtained the right to call itself Yale Uni¬ 
versity only since 1887. The college and university instruc¬ 
tion, including that given in technical schools, is interesting 
to us at the present time from several points of view. In 
the first place, in America, as here, great complaint is made 
that students come to college ill prepared to do the work, 


362 


MACROCOSM US 


that games occupy a large share of attention, and that the 
bonds of discipline have been unduly slackened of late years. 
Moreover, it is said that those who have been brought up in 
towns are not such satisfactory students as those who have 
been brought up in the country. The latter are not only 
more earnest, but more practical. On this account the spirit 
prevailing in some of the Western colleges is far better than 
that met with in many Eastern colleges. Although the elective 
system prevails very largely in those cases in which gradua¬ 
tion from college is a necessary preliminary to professional 
study, the course is prescribed. It is very noteworthy that the 
course laid down is a broad one/’ 

Henry W. Diederich, U. S. Consul, Bremen, Germany, 
1904, thus speaks of university work in America and in Ger¬ 
many: “During the nineteenth century German universities 
led the world in erudition and scientific investigation and 
their great professors attracted many students from all parts 
of the world in quest of higher education. But times have 
altered. Having myself been engaged in educational work as 
a college professor for a good part of my manhood, I have 
naturally taken a good deal of interest in the life and work 
at the various institutions of learning in this country, and it 
is my impression that facilities for a higher education in the 
United States are improving much more rapidly than in Ger¬ 
many. Despite all our imperfections, one can not but admire 
the great upward strides which the American system of 
education, from the humble district school up, has been making 
during the last few decades. American educational institu¬ 
tions are the best equipped in the world., I know of but one 
German university that can claim to be up to the times in this 
regard, and it stands third in the list of attendance.” Again 
the Consul says: “No American need any longer come to 
this or go to any other country for higher education. In my 
judgment the United States offers to-day facilities for 
collegiate, academical and post-graduate studies equal in 
quantity and quality to those offered by any country in the 
Old World.”. 


CHAPTER II. 

Problems of Rationalism and Civilization. ' 

When the keen scrutiny of skeptics has found a place on 
this planet where a decent man may live in decency, comfort 
and security, supporting and educating his children un¬ 
spoiled and unpolluted; a place where age is reverenced, in¬ 
fancy protected, womanhood honored, and human life held in 
due regard; when skeptics can find such a place ten miles 
square on this globe, where the gospel of Christ has not gone 
before and cleared the way and laid the foundations that made 
decency and security possible—it will then be in order for 
these skeptical literati to move thither, and there ventilate 
their views. But so long as these men are dependent on the 
very religion which they discard, for every privilege they en¬ 
joy, they may well hesitate to rob the Christian of his hope 
and humanity of its faith in that Saviour who has given to 
men that hope of eternal life which makes life tolerable 
and society possible, and robs death of its terrors and the 
grave of its gloom .—James Russell Lowell. 

ATHEISM. 

Atheism reaches the limit of negation; the work of destroy¬ 
ing sacred things has gone so far that there is nothing else 
to do. Unqualified atheism is exceeding strange and startling. 
Faith in God is so inherent, in the very nature of man, that 
many wise, as well as good, men have thought that a thoroughly 
conscientious atheist has never lived. Bacon looked upon an 
atheist as rather of the heart than head, and that a contempla¬ 
tive atheist was a prodigy, a thing exceeding rare. Addison 
considered, an atheist an impudent liar, who knew it. Dr. 
Arnold, of Rugby, declared that he did not really believe that 
a conscientious atheist exists. 

Some philosophic minds have created a mechanical uni¬ 
verse, with fate or necessity as its lawgiver, and have thus, 
by their theory, gradually gone into atheism. Being averse 
to religion, they have thought that they could get along with- 

363 



364 


MACROCOSMUS 


out God. Others have thrown off all religious restraint, and, 
on the principle that the first wrong prepares for the second, 
and the second for the third, they have finally reached the 
gloomy depths of atheism. They simply say, in their hearts, 
there is no God. 

Atheism has always been most prevalent in the most 
degraded times in the history of the world. When a state 
has been most corrupt, then has atheism flourished. Athens 
banished any one who questioned the existence of supreme 
intelligence. Rome had long passed the climax of her glory 
when atheism first appeared, and it marked the deteriorating 
tendency of imperial Rome. Atheism was rampant during the 
French Revolution, and it had much to do in bringing about 
the moral earthquake shock of the eighteenth century. In 
Baron dTIolbach’s “System de la Nature,” the most dar¬ 
ing atheism was maintained. It was only through the most 
rigorous materialism that the Baron was able to reach this 
deadly conclusion. The “French Encyclopaedia of the 
Sciences ’ ’ was also thoroughly atheistic. I have always 
thought that religious despotism was the principal cause of 
such a fearful reaction on the part of the French people. 
Newton and Kepler, the greatest of scientists, by careful in¬ 
ductive study reach exactly the opposite conclusion to that 
reached by the French atheists. 

Atheism is so shocking to man’s higher nature that the 
most thoughtful have always been convinced that a 
society thoroughly atheistic is self-destructive. The French 
Revolution proved this position to be correct. During the 
triumph of atheism, the best men and women in France were 
being slaughtered. A few years ago, when in Paris, we felt 
profoundly sad in standing on the exact spot where the 
bloody guillotine had stood. France never did become sane 
again until the age of atheism had passed. Lamartine truly 
said: “The republic of these men without God was quickly 
stranded.” 

The development hypothesis is not necessarily atheistic. 
It may be sufficiently materialistic to be atheistic in tendency, 
and yet its advocates may not be theoretical atheists. Hugh 
Miller says: “God might as certainly have originated the 


PROBLEMS OF RATIONALISM AND CIVILIZATION 


365 


species through a law of development; the existence of a 
first great cause is as perfectly compatible with the one scheme 
as with the other.” 

In atheism, infidelity reaches a complete negation. It 
certainly would require infinite knowledge to establish such 
a monstrous negative. The research of the atheist would 
have to be complete, so far as the whole universe is con¬ 
cerned, to be able to change his negative into an affirma¬ 
tive, and be able to say that there is no God. The limita¬ 
tions of human knowledge are such that such an assertion 
becomes perfectly reckless and absurd. For such a person 
to claim a scientific basis for his reckless conclusion is to 
reverse all the processes of science. Hugh Miller showed 
wonderful scientific acumen in his great work on “The 
Footprints of the Creator.” 

The existence of God is really an intellectual necessity, 
for to deny His existence is to render the whole universe 
irrational. The a-priori arguments for the divine existence 
are not conclusive in themselves, but taken with other proofs 
they are very effective. The a-posteriori arguments have 
always been favorites with scientists, but must always be 
taken in connection with others to make them conclusive. In¬ 
ductive proof is not conclusive, unless taken in connection 
with deductive. Lord Bacon says: “God never wrought a 
miracle to convince atheism, because His ordinary works are # 
sufficient. ’ ’ The material phenomena without us and the 
mental phenomena within us give the lie to atheism. If this 
evidence and the superadded evidence of revelation will not 
convince men, there is nothing else that would probably reach 
their minds and hearts. Dr. Arnold, of Rugby, placed great 
stress upon what he called the practical truth of the existence 
of God. Let a man live on the hypothesis of its falsehood, 
and the practical result will be bad; that is, a man’s be¬ 
setting and constitutional faults will not be checked, and 
some of his noblest feelings will be unexercised; so, if he be 
right in his opinions, truth and goodness are at variance one 
with the other, and falsehood is more favorable to our moral 
perfection than truth, which seems the most monstrous conclu¬ 
sion which the human mind can possibly arrive at. 


366 


MACROCOSMUS 


PANTHEISM. 

Atheism sees God nowhere, and pantheism sees Him every¬ 
where. Pantheism does not deny the divine existence, but 
does deny the divine personality. While it does admit the 
divine glory of God, it denies the express image of His person. 
Pantheism is by no means a new doctrine, but was advocated 
by the Stoics in ancient philosophy. Zeno, the founder of 
this school, maintained that God is the universe and the uni¬ 
verse God. Pantheism was taught in India, by both the 
Brahmans and the Buddhists. ‘ They taught that the divine 
Being is not separated from, but is Himself the universe. Of 
all the countries in modern times, Germany has been the most 
prolific source of pantheism. Spinoza was the father of modern 
pantheism; he annihilated the distinction between the Creator 
and His works, and prepared the way for a logical system of 
pantheism. It must, however, be admitted that Spinoza did 
not fully deny thought on the part of God, and some of his 
followers were believers in Christianity. Schelling was per¬ 
haps the most distinguished representative of pantheism in the 
nineteenth century. His method was in no sense inductive, 
but strictly a priori. His system was highly attractive to the 
German mind. He strictly identified the subject and the 
object, and made them manifestations of the absolute. With 
him, nature was the self-development of God, and God only 
came to realize Himself in man. Only in man does God attain 
to self-consciousness. It is difficult to say just what Schelling 
makes out of the personality of God and the future state of 
existence for man. Strauss became an extreme pantheist in 
theology. God is, with him, a process of thought, and has no 
individual existence. Strauss finally became an atheist. 

Cousin, Carlyle, Emerson and Tennyson have all written 
things that have tended to pantheism, but they themselves did 
not deny the divine personality. There are elements of truth 
in pantheism, and these are recognized by even the Christ 
Himself: “I am the vine and ye are the branches.” This is 
what Browning would call the Higher Pantheism. Emerson 
would more properly be called an individualist; yet there are 
strong pantheistic elements in his teachings. He makes man 


PROBLEMS OF RATIONALISM AND CIVILIZATION 


367 


both the worshiper and the object of worship. He says: 
“Standing on the bare ground, my head bathed by the 
blithe air and uplifted into infinite space, all mean egotism 
vanishes. The currents of the universal Being circulate through 
me. 1 am part or particle of God.” Emerson was so great an 
individualist that we fear that at times he lost sight of God. 

The following are the results of pantheism, which posi¬ 
tively denies the personality of God: 

1. With the pantheist creation is not a free act, but a 
necessity. It is not the result of personal agency, but a 
blind process that goes on forever. 

2. Pantheism destroys all moral distinctions, and makes 
man totally irresponsible. Strauss says: “The human race 
is the Christ, the God-made man, the sinless one, that dies, 
rises again, and mounts into the heavens.” 

3. It renders prayer unnecessary. At most it claims that 
prayer can only benefit the one who prays, and that there is 
no personal God to hear prayer. 

4. Pantheism denies all immortality to the individual. 
The theory cjaims that the individual is absorbed, and lost 
forever. No life shall ever visit the mouldern urn, and no 
day ever dawn upon the night of the grave, if the extreme 

' position of the pantheist is true. 

5. Pantheism makes no distinction between the destiny 
of Jesus, the Christ, and that of Judas Iscariot, who be¬ 
trayed Him. The denial of the divine personality, if ac¬ 
cepted by the people in general, would ultimately destroy 
society. The world would be without hope, and there is no 
future for a world without hope. Pantheism, like atheism, 
is an absurdity. 

We adduce the following proofs in favor of the divine 
personality: 

\ 1. We can not account for our own personality except on 
the hypothesis of the divine personality. To deny our own 
personality is irrational, but not more so than to deny the 
personality of God. 

2. All thoughtful persons, when at their best, think that 
God is a real person. Such was the experience of the great 
Charles Darwin. 


368 


MACROCOSMUS 


3. The Bible teaches the divine personality, and no man, 
who denies the real personality of God, can give a rational 
reason for the existence of the Bible. It is the greatest book 
in the world. 

4. Jesus Christ alone can reconcile the absolute and the 
personal. Tie is the mediator between God and man. 

5. The Holy Spirit testified to the divine personality. 
On the day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit came from God, and 
not from a mere abstraction. The Holy Spirit Himself 
possesses personality, and testifies to the personality of God 
and the personality of man. 

' NATURALISM AND AGNOSTICISM. 

Christ can not be separated from the miraculous; His 
birth, His ministrations, His resurrection, all involve the 
miraculous, and His religious work in the human heart is a 
continuing miracle. Eliminate the miracles, and Christ be¬ 
comes merely a human being, and His gospel stripped of 
divine authority .—William Jennings Bryan. 

Naturalism is essentially dogmatic, whereas agnosticism is 
essentially skeptical.— Dr. James Warel in “Naturalism and 
Agnosticism.” 

Naturalism is sometimes called rationalism, and is thus 
distinguished from atheism and pantheism; it is distinguished 
from the atheist by its theoretical belief in divine power; it 
is distinguished from the pantheist, who believes in an all- 
pervading divine energy. Pantheism identifies God with His 
works, while naturalism banishes Him to a distant solitude. 

The truly rational and Scriptural view of the universe 
considers God present in the world with the same power with 
which He made it. There is as much evidence of God’s power 
in sustaining and controlling the universe as in originally 
creating it. The following lines of Thomson’s “Seasons” 
contain the substance of a true philosophy: 

“But wandering off with brute unconscious gaze, 

Man marks not Thee, marks not the mighty hand, 

That, ever busy, while the silent spheres 
Work in the secret deep; shoots, streaming thence 
The fair profusion that o’erspreads the spring; 

Flings from the sun direct the flaming day.” 


PROBLEMS OF RATIONALISM AND CIVILIZATION 


369 


This language distinguishes God from the material world, 
and is neither atheism nor pantheism; nor is it naturalism 
which denies Divine Providence. There is a kind of natural¬ 
ism that might be identified with deism, that admits God’s 
power in original creation, but strictly restricts it there. 

Naturalism claims that miracles are impossible because 
they are unnatural, but they use the word “natural” in a re¬ 
stricted sense. Miracles are in harmony with God’s highest 
laws, and in this sense they are not unnatural. It is great 
folly in man to try to place restrictions upon the Almighty. 

M. Auguste Comte, who was by his disciples called the 
Bacon of the nineteenth century, tried to build up a complete 
system of naturalism which would not need the providential 
care of the Creator; but he lived long enough to see that this 
system was a failure without religion. Lord Bacon was cor¬ 
rect when he said: 4 ‘ God without dominion, providence and 
final causes is nothing but fate and nature.” 

The immortal Newton said: “Every true step made in in¬ 
ductive philosophy is to be highly valued, because it brings 
us to the First Cause.” In concluding his “Principia” he says: 
“The whole diversity of natural things can have arisen from 
nothing but the ideas and will of one necessarily existing 
being, who is, always and everywhere, God supreme, infinite, 
omnipotent, omnipresent, absolutely perfect.” A little more 
than a century later, La Place published his “Me’canique 
Celeste,” and when Napoleon told him that he had not men¬ 
tioned God, he replied: “Sire, I have no need of any such 
hypothesis.” Scientific writers yet, at times, omit God, which 
omission in his da} r Sir Isaac Newton pronounced an absurdity. 

Descarte compared science to the* city, and all other 
knowledge to the country. While science may encroach upon 
other knowledge, it is certain that there is* something beyond 
mere physical knowledge. Christian Wolff insisted that 
rational knowledge was even more important than empirical. 
While it may be possible to regard a brain change as a case 
of matter and motion, it would certainly be ridiculous to con¬ 
ceive of a change of mind in this way. Professor Huxley 
became a disciple of David Hume, and this largely cured him 
of materialism. With Hume he became skeptical in reference 


370 


MACROCOSM US 


to both matter and mind, and originated what is called agnos¬ 
ticism. Professor Tyndall in his Belfast address admitted the 
importance of religion, and considered it strictly esthetic and 
emotional. The world needs a Shakespeare as well 'as a New¬ 
ton, and a Raphael as well as a Darwin. While all this is 
very well, it is certain that all true religion also requires the 
intellectual. 

At the present time we are much under the influence of 
the anti-miracle school of Germany, of which school Paulus 
and Strauss were the leaders. Strauss, like Hume before him, 
was guilty of a petitio principii. They claimed that miracles 
were impossible, which was simply begging the question. Their 
positive denial of Divine Providence was positively reckless. 

While Strauss claimed to introduce a new theory, he was 
only a naturalist or rationalist in another shape. He admitted 
the Gospels as supernatural narratives, but tried to explain 
them away as unhistorical. Dr. Newman, his English disciple, 
declared that miracles formed the substance and groundwork 
of the narratives, and, like the figure of Phidias on Minerva’s 
shield, could not be erased without spoiling the entire composi¬ 
tion ; yet he tries to show that they originated without any 
historical foundation. Phidias on Minerva’s shield is fiction 
and not reality. He made the following declaration: “Miracles 
are not, and never were” The allegory, the legend, the myth, 
according to this position, is to explain everything away. While 
the naturalism of Strauss and his disciples may differ some¬ 
what from that of Paulus and the earlier rationalists, it is 
naturalism still. Strauss says that it is impossible for a dead 
person to come back from the grave. All is explained on the 
ground of visions and excited feelings. Naturalism and pan¬ 
theism meet here, and it is the most unphilosophical position 
ever tried to be imposed on the world. It is so much so that 
even the rationalist Kheim admits that Jesus appeared to His 
disciples after His death. 

A miracle is neither impossible nor incredible to one who 
believes in the existence of God. Neander, Muller, D’Aubigne 
and others conceded nothing to the rationalists, but main¬ 
tained that miraculous phenomena are not violations of the 
laws of nature. Miracles may be supernatural from an earth- 


PROBLEMS OF RATIONALISM AND CIVILIZATION 


371 


ly view, yet natural from a heavenly view. Hume claimed that 
a miracle is incredible, for he reasoned from his own personal 
experience, and not from the experience of mankind. Strauss 
claimed that they are impossible, for he reasoned from the 
standpoint of his idealistic philosophy. It was the left wing 
of Hegelianism, and it is not surprising that Strauss finally 
went into atheism. The position of the naturalistic philosophy 
is most unnatural, and it can give no rational explanation of 
the life of Christ and the history of Christianity. 

Naturalism has, in physical science, given origin to the 
mechanical theory of the universe; in mental and moral science 
it has given exclusive importance to external circumstances as 
influencing human conduct; in theology it has been to banish 
entirely the miraculous element in the Bible. It consequently 
leads to infidelity, and we can safely urge the following objec¬ 
tions to it: 

1. This theory degrades God, and leads to a reckless anthro¬ 
pomorphism. Dr. Chalmers in his astronomical discourses 
shows the absurdity of this position. 

2. It banishes divine agency from the universe, and claims 
the all-sufficiency of physical laws. It is not in harmony with 
the plain evidence of geology and physical geography. All 
must admit that God interposed at the beginning of creation, 
and there is no good reason why a naturalist should object 
to his interposition at the beginning of Christianity. 

3. Any analogy is false that tries to make the universe 
entirely self-sustaining. The universe could not create itself, 
nor can it sustain itself. It requires the power of God to sus¬ 
tain as well as create. 

4. Naturalism can give no adequate reason for the exist¬ 
ence of Christianity and its mission in this world. When 
the supernaturalism is banished, the life of Christ is reduced 
to an absurdity. 

5. Naturalism, when it excludes Divine Providence and the 
supernatural, is directly opposed to the teaching of the Bible. 
Any careful student of the Bible must conclude that it con¬ 
tains a revelation from God, and is consequently of super¬ 
human origin. Robert Hall says: “A religion without its 
mysteries is like a temple without its God.” Naturalism is 


t 

372 


MACROCOSMUS 


most unnatural when viewed from the true scientific stand¬ 
point. 

According to Lord Kelvin’s “Ideal Fluid,” matter is non¬ 
matter in motion. Some mechanical theorists are like “Alice 
in Wonderland, ” purely imaginary. Alice said that she had 
often seen a cat without a grin, but never before a grin with¬ 
out a cat. The mechanical theory as an explanation of the 
universe receives its deathblow from the progress of mechanical 
physics itself. The theory begins with abstractions and ends 
with abstractions. Helmholtz declares that we perceive not 
matter, but energy alone. According to Kant, life means a 
capacity to act or change according to an internal principle. 
This must be thought, for we know of no other internal activ¬ 
ity. Naturalism separates nature from God, subordinates 
spirit to matter, and sets up unchangeable law as supreme. 
Evolution implies ideal ends controlling physical means. We 
have no evidence of definite space or time limits. 

George J. Romanes, a professor of physiology at the Royal 
Institution, London, wrote, in 1888, a book against super- 
naturalism, which attracted wide attention. In 1894, after 
more thorough investigation, he not only became a theist, but 
also a believer in the divinity of Christ. Professor Huxley was 
for many years a determined opponent of supernaturalism. In 
fact, his writings caused me to make the investigations that 
finally led to the publication of my book entitled “Cultura. ” 

The “Life and Letters of Professor Huxley,” published in 
1909, contain the following language: “Science seems to me to 
teach in the highest and strongest manner the great truth 
which is embodied in the Christian conception of an entire 
surrender to the will of God.” 

Sometime ago I clipped the following from a Sunday 
School Times, which is quite appropriate here: 

“Every period of time has its own peculiar point of 
attack on our Christian faith. The point may shift from time 
to time, but until the pressure of the enemy is broken at that 
one spot, we are likely to be steadily assailed there. 

“Not so very many years ago, the opponents of faith simply 
declared that there was no God. That was when natural 
science was young. As our knowledge has increased, that 


PROBLEMS OF RATIONALISM AND CIVILIZATION 


373 


denial has become untenable, for the wonderful construction of 
man, his mind and his universe, imperatively demand a 
constructor. 

“To-day the point of attack is directed against the person¬ 
ality of the creating God. The ‘whole atmosphere of our time, 
reflected in general conversation, public print, art, everything, 
denies the real personality of our God. In one way or another 
we are robbed of him as a real person, a Father, and we are 
offered as a substitute deity an impersonal mind and a set of 
machine-made laws that it has set in motion. 

“Many a devout heart has suffered from this attack,, not 
realizing that it was the battle of the day and hour, and that 
the great enemy was pressing hard against them. We are in 
effect told this: Yes, there is a God, but it is childish to pray 
to Him; the great Creator will not, and indeed can not, change 
a fixed law for your especial benefit. And sometimes, in the 
midst of an anguish of heart-filling petition, our hearts are 
chilled to numbness by the sudden fear that perhaps this is 
so. The world outside simply knows, beyond the shadow of a 
doubt, that there is no use in prayer unless it be a good exer¬ 
cise for the petitioner, and is just as certain that the battle is 

always to the strong, the race to the swift; therefore, it is better 
to hustle than to be holy, for you will have only what you can 
get, anyway. It is a cruel and a merciless dart; it pierces many 
a good armor, and many a Christian man or woman who should 
be fighting in the front ranks is lying wounded in the rear. 

Their work in the Sunday school or church or in society has 

become weak and perfunctory, or ‘scientific’ and spiritless. 
And the dart is as false as it is cruel. 

“It is perfectly true that the phenomena of this world 
operate in certain fixed ways that we call laws, and it may 
be perfectly true that not one of these ways of operation is 
ever changed a hair Vbreadth. But besides all this it is just 
as true, also, that God can manipulate those laws to obtain any 
result that He may wish. This last is what the faithless do 
not know, and can not comprehend. 

“A great pipe-organ has one or two thousand pipes. 
Some are twenty feet long, and large enough for a man to 
stand in; others are no bigger or longer than a common lead- 


374 


MACROCOSM US 


pencil; some are made of wood, some o^ zinc, some of lead, 
and every one is set to make its own peculiar note. No 
pipe ever makes any other note than its own. But the organ¬ 
ist is not limited to one tune. He can play any tune he may 
wish, simply by changing the order of the notes which he 
sounds. 

“The laws of‘God’s world are fixed; but on that great 
organ He is master, and it obeys His will, and rest assured 
that He it is that is playing the melody of your life. If 
there is a minor chord now and then, or if sometimes the 
music almost dies away, believe that He is at the keyboard, 
and that in the end you shall hear the great chorus of victory. 

“The greatest achievement of the human mind is to be 
conscious of the person of God, a person just as real and 
near and as conscious of our work and sleep and play as 
any companion that we see with our eyes. This is the aim 
of creation: ‘He made of one every nation of men . . . that 
they should seek God, if haply they might feel after Him 
and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us.’ 
And that word ‘achievement’ does not mean that only those 
of exceptional mind and purpose can know God, nor that 
we know Him only after serious effort.” 

The greatest rationalists of history have been believers 
in God and the future life. Such was the case with Voltaire, 
of France, and Frederick the Great, of Prussia. Joseph 
Priestley, one of the greatest of British thinkers, was a 
deist and a firm believer in the doctrine of immortality. 
Even Tom Paine, the great American skeptic, advocated 
theism and the doctrine of a future state. Ex-President 
White, of Cornell University, and Dr. Draper, author of “In¬ 
tellectual Development in Europe,” although the greatest of 
destructive critics, were both believers in the fundamental 
elements of Christianity. If a man believes in God and a 
future state, he necessarily accepts the supernatural. In 
fact, religion deals with and implies the supernatural. 

CHRISTIAN THEISM AND SPIRITUALISM. 

Even rationalistic theologians admitted that the Bible 
teaches the doctrine of redemption, but spiritualism conies 


PROBLEMS OF RATIONALISM AND CIVILIZATION 


375 


along and even denies this. Unitarianism changes ground, 
and becomes what is called k 1 The School of Progress. ’ ’ 
Theodore Parker declared: “What is of use to man lies in 
the plane of his own consciousness, neither above it, nor 
below it. ’ ’ Many writers followed this distinguished teacher, 
and took the position that miracles are. impossible. This has 
been called the “Left Wing of Unitarianism.” They went 
forward to eliminate everything that is supernatural in the 
Bible, even the scheme of redemption itself. Mr. Parker 
said: “Christianity is dependent upon no outside authority; 
we verify its eternal truths in our souls.” He practically 
rejected the Bible, and identified all revealed religion with 
natural religion. With him philosophical spiritualism was 
to be the next great reformation. “Our theology,” said he, 
“has two idols—the Bible and Christ.” He was willing to 
change the Bible for what appeared to him to be an in¬ 
fallible inward oracle. He certainly had an idol here. 

Mr. F. W. Newman was for many years the leader of 
this school in England. Mr. Newman’s “Phases of Faith” 
became largely the creed of the party. At first he only 
depreciated miracles, but finally rejected them. He said : 
“Miraculous phenomena will never prove the goodness and 
veracity of God, if we do not know these qualities in Him 
without miracle.” Suppose we grant this to be true, it does 
not preclude miracle as attesting a special manifestation of 
goodness. The purpose of Newman, like some at the present 
time, was to depreciate the value of miracles, when, in fact, 
a religion without the supernatural is an absurdity. Jesus 
said: “The works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear 
witness of me.” Mr. Newman finally went so far as to 
banish from his theology a historical Christ. He claimed 
that Jesus was not perfect, and that the portrait drawn by 
the Evangelists is largely imaginary. In concluding his 
“Phases of Faith,” Mr. Newman says: “If the spirit within 
us and the Bible without us are at variance, we must either 
follow the inward and disregard the outward law, else we 
must renounce the inward law and obey the outward.” 
Mr. Newman does not hesitate to renounce the Bible, and* 
follow what he calls his inward light. The result was he 


376 


MACROCOSM US 


renounced the Bible scheme of redemption. We greatly 
fear that the destructive part of what we call the higher 
critics is tending precisely in the same direction. 

Mackay’s “Progress of the Intellect” belongs to the 
same school as Newman’s “Phases of Faith.” It is likewise 
hostile to the Bible plan of salvation. Mr. Mackay places 
the Old Testament on a par Avith the mythology of the 
Greeks. He assumes that all religion is a form of symbolism, 
and places Christianity on the same le\ r el with the idolatry 
of pagan nations. Like Theodore Parker and others of this 
school, he claims that the moral conceptions of Christianity 
are not peculiar to itself, but an essential part of all civiliza¬ 
tion. He, like Mr. Parker, adcmcated what they called an 
absolute religion, which Avith them meant nothing more than 
a sense of dependence, or a feeling of divine sympathy. 

We urge the following objections to this school of 
thought : 

1. It surrenders Christianity into the poAver of mere sen¬ 
timent. Parker, Newman and Mackay make mere sentiment 
the test and arbiter of truth. They claim that the Bible 
doctrine of redemption is out of harmony Avith the Father¬ 
hood of God. It is certain that reA r ealed religion is as much 
in harmony with the character of God as is natural religion. 

2. Their vieAv of the divine character is partial and one¬ 
sided. God is just and Avise as Avell as good. In the atone- 

* 

ment we see the paternal character of God in its highest ele¬ 
ments. “Mercy and truth meet together, righteousness and 
peace embrace each other.” 

3. The Scripture doctrine of depravity is true to the very 
nature of man. A thoughtful student of the nature of man 
can see the need of the scheme of redemption. 

4. The doctrine of pardon on the ground of the atonement 
is in perfect harmony Avith the Fatherhood of God. The 
sinful tendencies in man’s nature make pardon a necessity, 
if man is ever to be lifted to a higher plane of life. 

5. The doctrine that the Holy Spirit through the gospel 
comdcts men of sin is reasonable doctrine. It is not possible 
to find anything so Avell adapted to the constitution of man 
as is the gospel. The gospel makes a bad man good, and this 


PROBLEMS OF RATIONALISM AND CIVILIZATION 


377 


is certainly God’s power. It also assures him of happiness 
in this life, and also in the life to come. Christian theism 
presents to man the highest spiritual ideals of which he is 
capable of conceiving. The magnetic power of God lifts 
man from the valley of death into the realities of the eternal 
world. God certainly guarantees to the true believer eternal 
life. Your lasting happiness depends upon what you think 
of God. 


CHAPTER III. 


Problems of the Future Life and Civilization. 

SECTION I.-THE REALITY OF GOD. 

Intuition and experience fully establish the reality of God. 

Our whole treatment of the past has been based upon the 
conviction that human destinies are not decided by mere 
opinions and whims, either of individuals or masses of in¬ 
dividuals, but rather they are ruled by spiritual necessition 
with a spiritual aim and purport, and that for man a new 
world dawns, transcending merely the natural domain—a new 
world—a world, namely, of spiritual life. It is only this con¬ 
viction that has enabled us to assign to history any positive 
meaning and extract from it all the efforts and errors of 
different men and different ages some definite and perma¬ 
nent result. 

RUDOLPH EUCKEN. 

It will be said that, even so, we do not transcend our intel¬ 
lect, for it is still with our intellect, and through our intellect, 
that we see other forms of consciousness. And this would be 
right if we were pure intellect; if there did not remain, around 
our conceptional and logical thoughts, a vague nebulosity, 
made of the very substance out of which has been formed the 
luminous nucleus that we call intellect. Therein reside cer¬ 
tain powers that are complementary to the understanding, 
powers of which we have only an indistinct perception when 
we are shut up in ourselves, but which will become clear and 
distinct when they perceive themselves at work, so to speak, 
in the evolution of nature. They will then learn what sort 
of effort they must make to be intensified and expanded in 
the very directions of life. 

PROF. HENRI BERGSON. 

The above is worthy of very careful thought, and it is 
valuable in studying the problem of the divine existence. 

Intuition and experience will ordinarily convince any 

person of the existence of a supreme Being. We are con- 

378 



PROBLEMS OF THE FUTURE LIFE AND CIVILIZATION 379 

vinced of God s existence very much in the same way as we are 
convinced of our own. If one man doubted the existence of 
another, it might be somewhat difficult to prove it to him. 
We could say that our eyes and ears fully convince us of the 
existence of another. But the skeptic might insist that our 
senses deceive us; that we see and hear others in our dreams 
that do not exist. We are conscious of our own existence, ' 
and are conscious of the fact that we see and converse with 
others. In our experience with others, we intuitively infer 
their existence. Much the same way we reach the conviction 
of the divine existence. We believe in God because we were 
made to believe in Him. 

We believe in God much the same way as we believe in 
the outward world. By experience we become acquainted with 
it. Not even for a moment do we doubt the veracity of our 
consciousness, and we naturally infer the existence of the 
great system of nature. By experience we become acquainted 
with our own father, and learn to depend upon him. In much 
the same way we learn to depend upon our Father in heaven. 

Some persons, who have no tune, might deny the existence 
of music; but a history of the great writers, as well as the 
eminent musicians, is sufficient to convince a rational being 
of the existence of music. The same thing can be said in 
reference to art. One who studies the history of the great 
artists, and sees the great art galleries, has convincing evi¬ 
dence of the existence of art. The same thing can be said 
of religion. The great institutions of religion could not exist 
if religion were a mere fiction. We certainly have a right to 
infer the existence of matter from our experience with ma¬ 
terial phenomena, the existence of mind from our experience 
with mental phenomena, and the existence of God from our 
experience with spiritual phenomena. 

Max Muller, in a course of lectures at the Royal Institu¬ 
tion, London, said: “Religion is a mental faculty which, in¬ 
dependent of, nay, in spite of, sense and reason, enables man 
to apprehend the infinite under different names and various 
disguises. Without the faculty, no religion, not even the 
lowest ’ worship of idols and fetishes, would be possible, and, 
if we will but listen attentively, we can hear in all religions 


380 


MACROCOSMUS 


a groaning of spirit, a struggle to conceive the inconceivable, 
to utter the unutterable, a longing after the infinite, a love 
of God.” 

I had the privilege of hearing lecture the great German 
theologian, Professor Pfleiderer, who has been considered the 
greatest in his line in the world, and while he did not exact¬ 
ly agree with Max Muller, there was really no important 
difference. The criticism of the German professor was only 
verbal in its nature. 

In his Hibbert lectures, Max Muller discusses still fur¬ 
ther the way in which man apprehends the infinite, and the 
following language demands the most careful study: “I an¬ 
swer, without any fear of contradiction, that it is his senses 
which give him the first impression of infinite things, and 
supply him in the end with an intimation of the infinite. 
Everything of which his senses can not perceive a limit is to 
a primitive savage, or any man in an early age of intellectual 
activity, unlimited or infinite. Man sees; he sees to a certain 
point, and there his eyesight breaks down. But exactly 
where his sight breaks down, there presses upon him, 
whether he likes it or not, the perception of the unlimited 
or the infinite. It may be said that this is not perception, 
in the ordinary sense of the word. No more it is, but still 
less is it mere reasoning. In perceiving the infinite, we 
neither count, nor measure, nor compare, nor name. We 
know not what it is, but we know that it is, and we know 
it because we actually feel it and are brought in contact 
with it. If it seems too bold to say that man actually sees 
the invisible, let us say that he suffers from the invisible, 
and this invisible is only a special name for the infinite. 
Therefore, as far as mere distance or extension is concerned, 
it would seem difficult to deny that the eye, by the very same 
act by which it apprehends the finite, apprehends also the 
infinite. The more we advance, the wider, no doubt, grows 
our horizon; but there never is or can be to our senses a 
horizon, unless as standing between the visible and finite on 
one side, and the invisible and infinite on the other. The 
infinite, therefore, instead of being merely a late abstraction, 
is really implied in the earliest manifestations of sensuous 


PROBLEMS OF THE FUTURE LIFE AND CIVILIZATION 381 


knowledge. Theology begins with anthropology. We must 
begin with a man living on high mountains, or in a vast 
plain, or on a coral island without hills and streams, sur¬ 
rounded on all sides by the endless expanse of the ocean, 
and screened above by the unfathomable blue of the sky; 
and we shall then understand how, from the mirages thrown 
upon him by the senses, some idea of the. infinite would arise 
in his mind, earlier even than the concept of the finite, and 
would form the omnipresent background of the faintly 
dotted picture of his monotonous life.” 

Dr. K. A. Thompson, a noted English theologian, in a 
reply to Comte’s “Positive Philosophy,” gives the following 
interesting argument: “Internal observation, and this alone, 
can have discovered to him that he is an intelligent and 
moral agent, or have taught him the meaning of the terms. 
But he has no such knowledge, he can make no such observa¬ 
tion of other minds. Whence, then, has he discovered that 
other men exist, who may be enlightened by his labors, and 
whose progress is his aim in his science of sociology? He has 
learned it by that other intellectual process which he pre¬ 
tends to ignore, by inferring the existence of other minds 
from the phenomena which show marks of intelligence, by 
the induction of the unseen cause from the visible effects. 
Whatever may be his objection to the hypotheses of electrical 
or luminiferous fluids, which is no question of metaphysics 
or theology, he certainly assumes and applies the very princi¬ 
ple, which he professes to set aside, when he affirms the ex¬ 
istence of other minds besides his own. Internal observation 
can alone discover that he is himself an intelligent and emo¬ 
tional being, or enable him to use the words; the principle 
of causality must be applied, along with self-knowledge and 
observation, to discover the existence of intelligent and emo¬ 
tional beings, and justify the fundamental assumption of 
sociology, that there is such a thing as society in the world. 
Thus, on his own showing, the theological notions of child¬ 
hood, which he so much despises, are better founded than the 
positive knowledge of his manhood. lie continues through 
life to believe in the existence of other men, but denies the 
principle on which this belief rests, and rejects another 


382 


MACROCOSMUS 


belief resting on the same foundation. In the theological 
period of childhood, the mind acted spontaneously, and was 
consistent in its conclusions. So true it is that God teaches 
the child better than the aged can teach himself. ” 

Jesus taught His disciples that they should become as 
little children, and that a child should lead even the mighty 
and the wise. 

Dr. McCosh gives us these wise words: “The idea of 
God, the belief in God, may be justly represented as native 
to man. He is led to it by circumstances in which he is 
placed, calling into energy mental principles which are 
natural to all. He does not require to go in search of it; 
it comes to Him. He has only to be waiting for it and dis¬ 
posed to receive it, and it will be pressed on Him from every 
quarter; it springs up naturally, as the plant or animal does 
from the germ; it will well up spontaneously from the depths 
of his heart; or it will shine on Him from the works of 
nature, as light does from the sun.” 

The existence of God and the unseen universe are as evi¬ 
dent as the existence of man and the visible universe. The 
things that are seen are temporal, while the unseen things 
are eternal. 

Man’s hope of a future life largely depends upon his 
belief in God and his knowledge of the nature of God. Paul 
teaches that in the future world God is to be all in all. 
When a man fully believes in God, he feels that his future 
life is guaranteed. Nothing can separate him from the love 
of God. 

SECTION II.—IMMORTAL LOVE. 

But now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; but the 
greatest of these is love.— Paul. 

Love is certainly the greatest thing in the world, and it 
transcends the world. Love is immortal. It is a word too big 
for earth alone, and is as great as even heaven itself. God 
is love. 

Tennyson’s last and strongest argument in favor of the 
future state is immortal love. In the first stanza of his 
prologue to “In Memoriam,” we read as follows: 


PROBLEMS OF THE FUTURE LIFE AND CIVILIZATION 383 


Strong Son of God, immortal Love, 

Wlhom we, that, have not seen Thy face, 

By faith, and faith alone, embrace, 

Believing where we can not prove. 

In this connection, read the following from “The Ancient 
Sage ’ ’: 

For nothing worthy proving can be proven, 

Nor yet disproven; wherefore thou be wise, 

Cleave ever to the sunnier side of doubt, 

And cling to faith beyond the forms of faith. 

The universality of love intimately relates it to the future 
world. The love of David and Jonathan, Jesus and Lazarus, 
Tennyson and Hallam, extends far beyond the confines of 
this sublunary earth. It reaches even to heaven itself, and 
is eternal. Love for the great and good who have gone 
before us into eternity is one of the strongeest arguments 
for immortality. The poet thus speaks: 

And love w r ill last as pure and whole 
As when He loved us here in time, 

And at the spiritual prime 
Rewaken with the dawning soul. 

Tennyson could not see how such love could be lost. 

Love is too precious to be lost. 

A little grain shall not bo spilt. 

When human love is so perfect and so enduring, we must 
look beyond the grave for its completion. Love is an im¬ 
perishable root, and we can look upon death only in the 
sense of a transition to a higher state. Love is a flower 
taken from an earthly garden, and transplanted into the 
eternal garden of God. The death of his friend turned the 
thoughts of Tennyson to the nature of death and the myster¬ 
ies of life. Sorrow lifted the heart of the poet upward, 
and material love became spiritualized. It is certainly diffi¬ 
cult to grasp the full meaning of death. “I change, but I 
can not die,” said Shelley. “There is no death; what seems 
so is transition,” said Longfellow. In the following lines 
our great poet becomes quite hopeful: 


384 


MACROCOSM US 


Oh, yet we trust that somehow good 
Will be the final goal of ill, 

To pangs of nature, sins of will, 

Defects of doubt, and taints of blood; 

That nothing walks with aimless feet; 

That not one life shall be destroyed, 

Or cast as rubbish to the void, 

When God has made the pile complete. 

Behold, we know not anything; 

I can but trust that good shall fall 
At last far off—far off—at last to all, 

And every winter change to spring. 

In this connection I want to quote the following from 
Thackeray: ‘ ‘ If love lives through life and survives through 
all sorrow, and remains steadfast with all changes, and in 
all darkness of spirit burns brightly, and, if we die, deplores 
us forever and loves still equally, and exists with the last 
gasp and throb of the faithful bosom, whence it passes through 
the pure soul, beyond death, surely it shall be immortal. 
Though we who remain are separated from it, is it not ours 
in heaven? If we love still those we lose, can we altogether 
lose those we love?” 

Paul’s eulogy on love in 1 Corinthians, thirteenth chap¬ 
ter, shows that the word comprehends more than this world 
alone will be able to fulfill. It reaches the realities of the 
great unseen universe. The apostle makes it cement together 
the stones of the temple, and bind together the members of 
the body of Christ. The extraordinary gifts were not to be 
compared to it. They all pass away, but love is eternal, and 
intimates immortality to man. Even martyrdom has no 
merit compared to love. 

Paul’s eulogium on the positive excellence of love has 
been compared to that of a great Greek writer five hundred 
years before his day; but we scarcely have any evidence that 
Paul ever saw this eulogy. Anyway, Paul’s towers above it 
as the Acropolis towers above the sea. Paul’s eulogy shows 
in detail how this fruitful grace runs out in all the inter¬ 
course with others, and carries with it healing virtues. It is 
the paramount virtue, because it really comprehends all 


PROBLEMS OP THE FUTURE LIFE AND CIVILIZATION 


385 


others. It fulfills the law, and is only itself fulfilled in 
eternity. 

The apostle clearly shows that love is eternal. The gifts 
of which the Corinthians boasted were only temporary, and 
even the universal Christian graces were far less compre¬ 
hensive than love. No time could ever come wh'en love would 
give way to a higher quality of the human soul. While 
faith, hope and love would eternally abide, the greatest of 
these is love. Love partakes of the divine nature, and the 
highest enjoyment of man’s communion with God. Love 
unites heaven to earth, and earth to heaven. 

SECTION III.-PERPETUAL PROGRESS AND THE FUTURE STATE. 

Prof. John Fiske, author of the “Cosmic Philosophy,” 
presented a strong argument in favor of a future life from the 
doctrine of evolution, which would be meaningless if there 
was no life after death. Prof. William James insisted that 
the brain is only an instrument by which we transmit our 
thoughts. There was no good reason why there might not be 
a world of spirit, having its own means of communication. 

Tennyson taught that progressive development points to 
God and a future state. 

“ Throve and branch’d from clime to clime.” 

As the child needs its father to train it up to manhood, so 
the human race could not reach manhood without the care of 
the heavenly Father, who forever cares for His children. 
Death is only an incident, 'so far as God’s eternal care for His 
children is concerned. He made man for a destiny extend¬ 
ing far beyond this world. 

Tennyson was certainly right in claiming that progress 
that ends in death is really no progress at all. We can see 
no purpose either in the individual or species, if death ends 
all. There can be no true evolution which does not extend 
beyond the grave. 

“The herald of a higher race, 

And of himself in higher place.” 

God has ordained that the conscious spirit shall outlive all 
the ages of material phenomena, and be prepared for the 
realities of the great unseen universe. 


386 


MACROCOSM US 


The doctrine of evolution affords a powerful argument in 
favor of immortality and a future life. Professor Schiller, of 
Oxford, says: “It is, however, some consolation to think that 
the past course of evolution seemingly sanctions the belief, of 
those who would have us take that view, of the future which 
extends into 'another life. Certainly the expansion of the 
future, of which our action takes account, is one of the most 
marked characteristics of a progressive civilization. The 
animal looks into the future not at all, and the savage but 
little; but, as civilization grows, the future consequences of 
our action become more and more important, and are pre¬ 
pared for more and more. When we have dared to forecast 
the future of the race, when our coal supply shall be ex¬ 
hausted, when we have looked unflinchingly upon that un¬ 
imaginably distant period when the sun’s light shall fail, 
shall we shrink from rising to the contemplation of a future 
that extends immeasurably further?” 

Professor Schiller clearly shows that there is nothing in 
either philosophy or science against immortality and a future 
life. The doctrine of progressive development really sug¬ 
gests such a life to make it rational. Read carefully the fol¬ 
lowing: “Nevertheless it may, I think, be shown that the 
assumption of psychical continuity would be quite compatible 
with the prevalence of an almost complete dissociation between 
this world and the next. For any great event tends to dis¬ 
sociate us from our part, and would thus apply a fortiori to 
an event like death, which ex hypotliesi launches us into a 
new world. A new world, moreover, would not only engross 
us by its novelty, but also by the practical need of accom¬ 
modating ourselves to new conditions of existence. Hence, 
the psychological conditions for great concern about the 
world we had left behind us would hardly be present.” 

Evolution that is really scientific enables the true student 
to look across the Jordan of death to the realities of the great 
unseen universe. Professor Schiller shows, from the stand¬ 
point of philosophy, that we are able to form rational con¬ 
ceptions of the future world. The future life is a priori 
probable, and we fully believe that its verification a posteriori 
can be made quite certain. It is thought, by many eminent in- 


PROBLEMS OF THE FUTURE LIFE AND CIVILIZATION 387 


vestigators, that our existence in the future world can be made 
as certain as our existence in the present world. 

The soul, which has capacities for progress that can not 
be reached in this world, must have a future state to ensure 
their perfection. The brute reaches a point of perfection 
which it can never surpass, but not so man in this transitory 
sphere. He dies before the mind is ready for its greatest 
work, and naturally feels that he must have an opportunity 
to more fully unfold the capacities with which he has been 
endowed by his Creator. 

All rational progress necessarily points to an eternal life 
for man. Nothing less than eternity can fully satiate his 
higher intellectual and spiritual nature. The great preacher 
Channing thought that man’s intellectual and moral nature 
guarantees a future state. 

SECTION IV.-THE RATIONALITY OF THE UNIVERSE. 

The philosophical argument for a future state is founded 
upon the laws of the human mind. Personal immortality is 
necessary to insure the rationality of the universe. Professor 
Howison, of the University of California, bases his argument 
upon the creative aspect of personality, and, as we are the 
most real beings in the world, our continued existence is 
rationally justified. 

The poet Browning uses the following strong language: 
“ Death is life, just as one daily or momentarily dying body 
is none the less alive, and ever recruiting new forces is our 
crapelike, churchyard word for change, for growth, there 
could be no prolongation of that which we call life. For 
myself, I deny death as. an end of anything. Never say of 
me that I am dead.” 

In this chapter I am much indebted to Professor Schiller, 
of Oxford, author of “Humanism,” and a friend of Professor 
James, of Harvard. I have never read an author, who could 
present the philosophical argument with more power than 
this Oxford professor. He rightly maintains that immor¬ 
tality is an ethical postulate. Deny the immortality of the 
individual, and it would not be possible to even think of 
the world as a harmonious whole. Whenever the moral 


388 


MACROCOSM US 


development of character is terminated by death, then we 
face the facts which indicate all cosmic justice, and incon¬ 
sistent with the conception of the world as a moral order. 

Professor Schiller says: “The ethical argument for im¬ 
mortality, then, is simply this: That, if death ends all, the 
moral life can not be lived out, moral perfection is impossi¬ 
ble, and the universe can not be regarded as at heart ethical. ’ ’ 

It is claimed by some that the ethical sphere does not 
require a future life. In reply to this, we may properly 
state that human character is only transmitted through the 
character of others, and, if all are ultimately annihilated, 
then human character is forever lost. Character is the 
possession of its owner, and can not be transmitted to others. 
Whatever worth, therefore, we assign to character is lost 
to the world in case there is no immortality. It must also 
be admitted that if the immortality of the individual is an 
illusion, that if the race is a manifest absurdity, this would 
certainly destroy the rationality of the universe. We can 
not for a moment grant this, so we must insist that im¬ 
mortality is an ethical postulate. 

Some years ago I studied Cousin’s work on “The True, 
the Beautiful, and the Good.” It tended to lift my con¬ 
ceptions to the very heavens themselves, and I will never in 
time or eternity forget the impression the work made upon 
my mind. A powerful argument for immortality can be 
based upon aesthetics, much the same way that we have 
based it upon ethics. 

Professor Schiller says: “The ideals, then, stand or fall 
together. They are rooted in the unity of the human soul, 
in the final solidarity of life’s endeavors. And when the 
supreme need arises, the outcry of the soul can summon to 
its aid all the powers that minister to its being; it wields a 
spell that reaches from the highest altitudes of scientific 
abstraction to the warmest pulsations of concrete emotion, 
and from the most ethereal fancy of the purest intellect to 
the blindest impulse of agonizing passion; it can exert from 
every element of our nature the confession of its solidarity 
with the rest of life, and set it in array on the dread 
battlefield wherever the gods contend against the giants—of 


PROBLEMS OF THE FUTURE LIFE AND CIVILIZATION 


389 


Doubt, Disorder and Despair.” Professor Schiller wisely 
reaches the conclusion that, in case we deny the ethical 
postulate of immortality, we can not otherwise than go into 
the most reckless skepticism and pessimism. 

In his last chapter and last page but one in his great 
book on “Humanism,” he gives us the following significant 
paragraph: “No conceivable empirical evidence can suffice 
to establish the destruction of the soul at death, because 
none can ever be relevant to the issue. For it can only con¬ 
cern appearances in the common world of the survivors. It 
can only prove that the rupture of connexion with it at 
death is utter and entire. But that is not enough. Even 
if a ghost returned to announce to us the complete extinc¬ 
tion of the soul at death, we could not credit so Hibernian 
an assertion. A scientific proof, therefore, of the annihila¬ 
tion of the soul is rigorously impossible. On the other hand, 
there is no such intrinsic impossibility about a scientific 
proof of the existence of consciousness through death; there 
is, in fact, no difficulty in considering empirical evidence 
sufficient to establish this doctrine with as high a degree of 
certainty as we have for any of our beliefs as matters of 
fact. The whole difficulty consists in getting the evidence. 
If we had succeeded, the theoretic adjustment of our opinions 
would be easy; all we should need to do would be to modify 
our original assumption that death means an absolute rupture 
of relations, an utter dissolution of the common world. We 
should have to say, instead, that death altered the mode of our 
communication of spirit with spirit, rendering different and 
difficult, without interrupting it altogether. But, properly in¬ 
terpreted and manipulated, the common world would persist 
through death. What exactly would be the nature of the 
common world, thus extended to include a life after death, 
philosophy could not, of course, forecast; that would remain 
for positive research to determine.” 

We close this section in the following language of the 
critical Dr. William A. Brown: “On the face of it the his¬ 
torical argument seems the most simple, direct and con¬ 
vincing that can be given. This bases faith in immortality 
upon the resurrection of Christ. We believe we shall live 


\ 




390 


MACROCOSM US 


after death with Jesus, because Jesus Himself has come back 
from the grave to assure us of this fact. For those who, on 
other grounds, believe in immortality, the resurrection is in¬ 
deed, as we have seen, a powerful reinforcement of faith. 
The assurance that Jesus is living to-day makes it easy for us 
to believe that we, too, shall survive death. It gives vivid¬ 
ness and reality to our thought of the future, and turns what 
would otherwise be a vague hope into an assured conviction.” 


CHAPTER IV. 

God in History and Civilization. 

Each nation lias its own peculiar mission as well as each 
individual. God has determined the bounds of the habitations 
of the nations. Each nation also makes its own peculiar con¬ 
tribution to civilization. We may say that much the same 
thing is also true of each race. We may go still further and 
also say that each age alone has its own mission and special 
contribution to civilization. These things clearly point to the 
fact that God is in history and civilization. 

The Christ of history taught the true doctrine in claiming 
that God is in nature as well as above nature. As the light is 
both in and above the rainbow, so God is both immanent and 
transcendent. We can truly say that in Him we live and move 
and have our being. 

Both nature and the Bible teach the true doctrine of evolu¬ 
tion or progressive development. I was in Boston when the 
great discussion on evolution was going on between Agassiz 
and his disciples and Darwin and his followers. Agassiz 
claimed that in passing from one species to another there was 
substitution, and Darwin insisted upon transmutation. I 
made up my mind at that time that whichever position might 
be true, it required the power of God to bring about the great 
result, and, although I have been a Fellow of the American 
Association for the Advancement of Science many years, I 
am still of the same conviction. At the Columbian Exposi¬ 
tion in Chicago, I greatly admired the skill of certain Lap¬ 
landers and Greenlanders in handling their dugouts, and felt 
that they were preparing the way for something better. So, 
in returning from Europe in 1907, we were in a great storm, 
and I was much interested in watching the movements of the 
great ship and thinking of its evolution from a dugout. It 
certainly was an evolution, but more of mind than of matter. 
There can be no evolution without an intelligent evolver. 
Evolution necessarily implies involution. God is in law, and 
the great chemist of Harvard University, Josiah Cooke, used 

391 


392 


MACROCOSMUS 


to declare that the laws of nature are the thoughts of 
God. Science can only interpret nature. 

THE GREAT NATIONAL RELIGIONS. 

The Chinese. The great religious teacher of China, for 
more than two thousand years, has been Confucius, one of the 
greatest lights of civilization. He taught lessons very im¬ 
portant, even in this age. “To rule with equity/’ said he, “is 
like the North Star, which is fixed, and all the rest go around 
it.” We sincerely hope that the great League of Nations will 
accomplish such rule. Confucius certainly had some concep¬ 
tion of the Supreme Being, for he said: “Worship as though 
the Deity were present.” “If my mind is not in my worship, 
it is as though 1 worshiped not.” It may be that Confucius 
had some conception of a coming Messiah, for one of his 
most authentic sayings is as follows: “In the West the true 
saint must be looked for and found.” The Christian Fathers 
claimed that the Greek sages were schoolmasters to lead men 
to Christ, and why may not Confucius be regarded in the same 
light ? In an important sense, God has been in the great 
national religions of the world. 

Brahmanism and Buddhism. Brahma represented high 
spiritual ideals, and Brahmanism produced a high civilization. 
The Sanskrit language is one of the greatest in the world, and 
it is the medium of a most wonderful literature. In India 
are also found some of the most wonderful monuments in the 
world. There is yet a great future for India. She has shown 
her high aspiration in the active and loyal part she took in 
the great war. Buddhism is very properly called “The Light 
of Asia.” It has destroyed caste, and, in many ways, tended 
towards the advancement of civilization. It has greatly in¬ 
fluenced the progress of civilization in both China and Japan. 
Recently we had the privilege of hearing a highly interesting 
lecture on Siam, by Mr. Frederick Dean, at the University of 
Texas. That little country is really a paradise, and it clearly 
shows the wholesome influence of Buddhism at its best. Many 
of the objectionable features of Buddhism in that country have 
been corrected by Christian missionaries, and the “Light of 
Asia” is becoming more and more the “Light of the’World.” 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


393 


The national religions have prepared the way for Chris¬ 
tianity. 

The Persian Religion. Of all others, this religion was the 
most sympathetic towards Judaism, and it was essentially 
monotheism. True, it recognized the author of evil, and in 
some sense he may have been regarded as a god; but the 
Persians held to the final triumph of Ormazd over all evil. 
The Persian religion was a revolt against the Pantheism of 
India, and it was based upon the eternal distinction between 
right and wrong. All religious thought among the Persians 
really centered in Zoroaster, the greatest of the Magi, who 
lived more than a thousand years before Christ. It is thought 
by some that we have derived our doctrine of a future life 
and the resurrection from Zoroaster through the Jews. Even 
if this were true, it would not condemn the doctrine, for 
Zoroaster certainly held to much truth. Certain disciples of 
Zoroaster came to Bethlehem, when Jesus was born, and there 
found the light of the world for which they had been searching. 

Assyria and Babylonia. Lord Lamington, at a recent meet¬ 
ing of the Royal Geographical Society, referred to a book by 
Dr. Flinders Petrie, in which that great author claimed that 
the civilization of Mesopotamia was three thousand years 
older than that, of Egypt. The distinguished professor plead 
for the preservation of the monuments at the very cradle of 
civilization. The religion of Assyria and Babylonia had had 
a long growth when Sargon, of Accacl, conquered the country 
in 3750 B. C., and it could not be assigned any other place 
than that of one of the greatest religions of the world. 
Assyur, of Assyria, did not greatly differ from Bel Meroclach, 
of Babylon, and if they did not represent monotheism, they 
did reach what Max Muller called henotheism. Their civil¬ 
ization is to this day one of the wonders of the world. 
Nineveh and Babylon are considered by historians as among 
the greatest of cities, and the author of the “Apocalypse” 
takes Babylon, from the standpoint of beauty and splendor, as 
a model for the new Jerusalem. 

As we learn from the journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 
archaeology has done much toward the reconstruction of 
Nineveh and Babylon. They have uneartheecl the great 


394 


MACROCOSM US 


libraries, and revealed a marvelous civilization. The great 
epic of Mesopotamia appears to have assumed its present form 
during a great literary revival in the reign of Khammurabi, 
about twenty-three hundred years before Christ. Babylonia 
was the great literary country of ancient times, and carried on 
an extensive literary correspondence with Egypt and other 
western powers. Abraham was called from this country of the 
highest culture to be a missionary in the great west. We can 
not otherwise than see the finger-prints of God in this wonder¬ 
ful history and civilization. 

Babylonian civilization was largely the product of a Tura¬ 
nian race, which invented the cuneiform system of writing. 
This union produced Babylonian civilization. More than two" 
thousand years B. C., Abraham left Chaldea and went west. He 
is one of the most important elements in the Book of Genesis. 
Beginning with the first chapter of Genesis and continuing to 
the close of the fourteenth chapter, we have very distinct 
Babylonian elements. Dr. Pinches, the great Assyrian scholar, 
sometime ago read before the Victoria Institute, London, a 
complete translation of the Babylonian epic, and it certainly 
bears a distinct likeness to the early chapters of Genesis. The 
Chaldeans had their Adam and Eve, their paradise and their 
great deluge. They also had their Noah and their beautiful 
rainbow. Dr. Pinches himself insisted that it was greatly 
inferior to the poem of Genesis. It has not the monotheism 
and spirituality of the Book of Genesis. Genesis shows evi¬ 
dence of a much higher revelation than does the Babylonian 
poem. 

Egypt. A number of distinguished critics are now inclined 
to think that Egyptian civilization was largely derived from 
Mesopotamia, and that it was really older than the Chinese. 
Probably the greatest problem connected with Egyptian 
civilization was the worship of animals. One of the newest 
sciences, anthropology, is gathering much important material 
towards the solution of this problem. The American An¬ 
thropological Association has done much valuable work on 
the western continent, and learned societies in Europe are at 
work in all parts of the world. The doctrine of totemism 
clearly shows that the relation of man to the lower animals 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 395 

was studied long before the origin of modern evolution. The 
doctrine of transmigration suggested that the god might dwell 
in the animal, and thus the god was worshiped and not the 
animal. It may be, also, that certain qualities represented by 
the animal were worshiped. This is done by many, even at 
the present time. 

Ammon-Ra and Osiris and Isis represented the highest 
elements in the religion of the Egyptians. This religion repre¬ 
sents quite a high monotheism and civilization, and clearly 
shows that God is in history. By suggestions from within, or 
in some other way, He reveals Himself to man. Man would 
not speak to God, if God had not in some way have spoken 
to him. 

Archaeology clearly shows that there is an Egyptian ele¬ 
ment in the Pentateuch. Thirty years ago it would have been 
thought impossible to throw any light on the history of 
Melcliizedek. I was myself, much surprised when the secre¬ 
tary of Victoria Institute sent me a copy of the document 
identifying the king of Salem with Ebed-tob. Among other 
important tablets found at Tel-el-Amarna, was one giving the 
correspondence between Ebed-tob, king of Jerusalem, and the 
ruling Pharaoh of Egypt. This Jerusalem king claimed that 
God had appointed him to his position, and that the sanctuary 
of Jehovah was at Mount Moriah. It was to this ruler that 
Abraham offered tithes after the defeat of Chedorlaomer and 
his allies. Prof. Flinders Petrie, at Tel-el-Amarna in 1892, 
threw much light upon Egyptian and Israelitish history. The 
story of Joseph has its parallel in the monumental history of 
Egypt. It is quite probable that the tomb of Joseph was at 
Tel-el-Amarna, where Lepsius found a hymn to the Solar Disk, 
but, of course, his body had been taken to Canaan when 
Israel finally left Egypt. The years of famine and the years 
of plenty are well illustrated by the monuments. 

Greece. Archaeology has largely reconstructed Greek his¬ 
tory. Homer has gods fighting with men on the plains of 
Troy. Cox and other destructive critics knew very well that 
gods did not enter into deadly conflict near the city of Troy, 
so they were prepared to reject, as mythical, all history on the 
subject. Dr. Schliemann’s excavations have largely recon- 


396 


MACROCOSMUS 


structed Greek history, and have fully established the fact 
that Priam lived at Troy, that there was a deadly conflict 
between the Greeks and Trojans, and that the Greeks finally 
destroyed Troy. 

The Greeks appear to have reached the very highest civil¬ 
ization from almost every standpoint. Take one of our great 
universities, and in almost every department the lectures begin 
with the Greeks. Nearly every science begins with the Greeks. 
This is true of the physical as well as the moral and political 
sciences. If you compare even one of our great historians with 
Herodotus or Thucydides, he will consider it a great compli¬ 
ment, and if you should compare a modern orator to Demos¬ 
thenes, he would remember you all the days of his life. We 
have no modern philosophers superior to Socrates, Plato, 
Aristotle. In art, also, the Greeks reached the very zenith. 

Zeus was the supreme deity of the Greeks, and from the 
very beginning strongly encouraged certain religious duties, 
such as hospitality, faithfulness to a pledge, and proper re¬ 
spect toward strangers. Homer calls Zeus the father of gods 
and men, and he is also called the god of gods. This is cer¬ 
tainly monotheism. Max Muller says: “When we ascend to 
the most distant heights of Greek history, the idea of God, as 
the Supreme Being, stands before us as a simple fact.” As 
the might of Zeus is irresistible, so is his wisdom unsearchable, 
To him belongs the balance in which is poised the destiny of 
men and nations. He is addressed as Zeus Pater, God our 
Father. Paul, in quoting from the poet Aratus in his work 
entitled “Phenomena,” says: “We are his offspring.” This 
looks like God in history. Apollo, the son and interpreter of 
Zeus, developed the very highest ideals in the Greek religion 
of which it was capable. The triad of Zeus, Athene and Apollo 
have been compared to the Trinity of Father, Son and Holy 
Spirit, in which Zeus represents the Father, Athene the Holy 
Spirit, and Apollo the Son of God, who came to declare the 
will of His heavenly Father. Mr. Gladstone, in his own way, 
reached precisely the same conclusion. 

Borne. Archaeology has also largely reconstructed Roman 
history. More than a quarter of a century ago the destruc¬ 
tive critic condemned a large portion of both Greek and Roman 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


397 


history. Livy placed impossible births on the same level as 
the Punic wars, and this placed the destructive critic in a 
frame of mind to reject both, and some of these critics went 
so far as to place the beginning of Roman history at the time 
Rome was sacked by the Goths. I fully believe in construc¬ 
tive criticism, but wdien the destructive goes mad, I feel com¬ 
pelled to part with it. Archa3ology has completely reversed 
the hasty conclusions of the destructive, and largely recon¬ 
structed ancient Roman history. 

When the author stood on the Capitoline hill and looked 
upon the hills of Rome, the history of the world flashed 
through his mind, and he thought at once of Rome's place in 
universal history. There was probably never a time when 
Rome had greater influence than at the present time. In addi¬ 
tion to the Latin language and literature, the Roman Church 
wields a powerful influence upon the civilization of the world. 
In many senses, Roman law yet largely rules the world. The 
great European nations are to this day dominated by Roman 
law. The same thing can be said of a number of countries in 
both North and South America. 

The early gods of Rome were more abstract and not so 
human as those of Greece. The Roman looked at things as 
mysteries, and his religion harmonized with that view. Their 
gods were mostly spirits. They were intense lovers of the 
home, and had their Lares and Penates. The first represented 
their dead ancestors, dwelt near their graves, and presided over 
the family as they had in life. The second represented the 
continuity of the family fortune. Mommsen claims that the 
Greeks prayed bareheaded in order to look directly to the 
gods, while the Romans prayed with the head covered in 
order to meditation, and possibly fearing that seeing the god 
might bring harm on them. 

While the family religion continued with the Romans to 
the end, the religion of the tribe had a still greater expansion, 
and the tribe itself united with other tribes, and religion became 
national. The Romans did not, like many other nations, 
develop a large priestly class, but their religion was more legal 
in its character. Rome gave law to the world, and thus accom¬ 
plished a marvelous mission. 


398 


MACROOOSMUS 


Jupiter and Vesta are the only Roman gods whom we can 
definitely identify with the Greek gods. They represent the 
Roman religion at its very best, and in Father Jupiter it reaches 
its highest point towards monotheism. He had his temple on 
the Capitoline hill, where he was worshiped in connection with 
Juno and Minerva. Augustus revived the Roman religion, 
and Virgil did for it much the same thing that Homer did 
for the Greek, but a new religion was arising above the eastern 
horizon, which was destined to supremacy in Rome. It is 
true that Christianity conquered Rome, but the Roman re¬ 
ligion still survives in the Roman Church. 

Etruria. The Etruscan religion made important contribu¬ 
tions, even to the Roman religion itself. What we know of the 
Etruscans, or Tuscans, is mostly from Greek and Latin authori¬ 
ties. Their inner character is quite well illustrated by their 
works of art. In some cases they offered human sacrifices, and 
made known the future by inspecting entrails of slaughtered 
animals. They had their heaven and hell, and their belief in 
a future state was even more definite than that of the 
Romans. Livy says that the Etruscan race excelled in the 
art of religious observance, and in some things went beyond 
any other race. The Etruscan god Tina corresponded to the 
Roman Jupiter, and seemed to point to a Turanian origin of 
the Etruscans. The architecture of the temple of Jupiter 
on the Capitoline hill was Etruscan. Max Muller, in his 
“Science of Religion,” says that the Tuscan god Tina was at 
times worshiped under the appellation of S’Ummanus, which 
seemed to mean the supreme god. This points in the direc¬ 
tion of monotheism. 

The high artistic gifts of the Etruscans reached their 
greatest expansion in the early Renaissance, when the Tuscans 
produced some of the greatest artists of modern times. The 
most noted of these were Donatello, Luca Della Robbia, and 
his nephew, Andrea Della Robbia. Donatello is considered the 
greatest modern sculptor before Michael Angelo. Among his 
greatest works are “Musical Angels,” “John the Baptist,” and 
“St. George.” In Luca Della Robbia, we have, according to 
Ruskin, the unity of all art. His greatest works are “Boys 
and Symbols,” “Madonna and Child,” and “The Ascension.” 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


399 


Andrea Della Robbia was his uncle’s successor, and was quite 
worthy to carry on the work of such a distinguished master. 
Some of his most noted works are “St. Francis and St. Dom¬ 
inick, “Bambino,” and “The Annunciation.” All lovers 
of art, who visit Florence, feel that they have been at the 
very gates of heaven. 

The Northmen. The author was, for a number of years, a 
member of the Viking Club, London, and studied with much 
care the literature of the Northmen. He would frequently 
compare the Eddas with the famous epics of the immortal 
Homer. 

Caesar, in his “Gallic War,” and Tacitus, in his “Ger¬ 
mania,” give very interesting descriptions of the ancient 
Teutons, and their accounts are in the main correct. They 
are described as a warlike people, of whom even the Germans 
stood in awe. They had blue eyes, fair hair, and were strict 
in their morals. They could scarcely be called savages. 
Tacitus claims that their gods were national—not tribal, and 
that their principal god was Terra Mater—Mother Earth. Caesar 
declares that the Germans worshiped the sun and moon. From 
the comparative study of the Aryan race, it appears that all 
branches of the Teutonic peoples used the same words for 
the days of the week, and that their religion was practically 
the same. 

The religion of the Teutons reached its highest develop¬ 
ment in Iceland, where it produced a great literature. Odin 
was its supreme deity, and the creator of its world. He was 
the inventor of the art of writing, and founder of poetry. 
About the first thing we know about the German race was the 
worship of Odin. He was really the war-god of the Germans, 
and they continue his worship even to the present time. In 
the Eddas, Odin becomes the “All Father,” and this is the 
nearest approach of the religion of the Teutons to monotheism. 
Thor was a son of Odin, and the god of thunder. Baldur, the 
son of Odin and Frigga, was the Apollo of German deities, 
and really the brightest of German deities, and the brightest 
of German gods. He represented a higher culture and civil¬ 
ization. The religion of the Northmen is rising towards a 
higher monotheism. It is preparing the way for Christianity, 


400 


MACROCOSMUS 


which is to become the universal religion. The Northmen are 
also destined to become great leaders in art and science. 

The Canaanites, Phoenicians and Carthagenians. There 
is a great similarity in these religions. The Canaanites were 
closely related to Israel, and that is the special reason that 
the Israelites were so ready to adopt their religious rites. The 
principal god of Canaan was called Baal, which was not a 
proper name, but a title meaning local. The companion god¬ 
dess of Baal was called Asherah, and she was not a historical 
deity, but the name was applied to different places over the 
country. She was much the same as Aphrodite with the 
Greeks, and Venus among the Romans. Her worship fre¬ 
quently led to licentiousness and demoralization. Israel was 
sorely tempted to adopt this worship. 

The religion of the Phoenicians was of a higher character 
than that of Canaan, and it tended to patriotism. In Tyre, 
Sidon and Carthage, it stimulated the people to quite a high 
civilization, which was largely disseminated over the then 
known world. “El” in the Hebrew means strong, and El-Eliun 
is translated “most high God,” of whom Melchizedek was the 
priest. So we find God in the history of Canaan and Phoe¬ 
nicia. The Semitic race spread all over these countries. 
Even Moloch is king in the initial element in Melchizedek. God 
determined the time before appointed of the nations. Even 
when human sacrifices were offered, the purpose was propitia¬ 
tion to their deity. Abraham would have offered Isaac, if God 
had not intervened. It appears that two hundred noble young 
men were offered at Carthage when the armies of the republic 
had suffered a severe defeat. They made the supreme sacri¬ 
fice for their country. Even Hamilcar is said to have offered 
himself after the utter defeat of his great army. Hannibal, 
certainly one of the very greatest generals in the world, 
carries in his name Baal, the supreme god of Carthage. He 
determined to make Carthage supreme, and came very near 
doing it. At one time, if he had been properly supported at 
home, he would evidently have destroyed Rome. 

The Phoenicians were noted for their art, and we learn from 
the Bible that Solomon was greatly indebted to them. Hiram, 
king of Tyre, not only furnished material for the temple, but 


(iOL) IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


401 


sent his great architect to direct the building of this immortal 
temple to the worship of God. The ground-plan of this tem¬ 
ple is very similar to that of a Greek temple; so the Phoeni¬ 
cians evidently influenced also Greek art. The priests of Israel 
also dressed like those of Tyre and Sidon, and they offered the 
same animals in sacrifice. The priests were supported in the 
same way in both countries. When we consider all these things 
it is not surprising that Israel sometimes worshiped the gods 
of Phoenicia. They were all seekers after God. 

Arabia. Islam came six centuries after Christianity, and 
was consequently the last of the great religions. The Arabs 
considered the age before Mohammed one of ignorance; but, 
as a matter of fact, they had quite a well-developed religion 
before the rise of Islam. For many years I have read, in the 
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, articles from Arabic 
scholars that fully established this fact. The Caaba of Mecca, 
representing the god, extended back to quite an early day. In 
fact, Allah, the god par excellence of Arabia, is not a historical 
god, but simply an idea pointing to the consolidating influence 
developing in Arabia. Dr. Draper, the great scientist and 
author, wrote a book on “The Force of an Idea,” and 
illustrated it in the marvelous progress of Islam. 

Mohammed did, in fact, find his country ripe for the great 
reform work which he brought about. In Allah there was 
already a tendency gradually developing into monotheism. 
There was a reform party known as Hanyfs, and Mohammed 
identified himself with them. He also became acquainted with 
Judaism and Christianity, and borrowed much from them. 
Mohammed appears to have been a sincere prophet until after 
the death of his wife, Kahdija, to whom he was thoroughly 
devoted. “Islam’’means submission, and “Moslem, ” one devoted 
to God; and Mohammed determined to submit to the divine 
will and be entirely devoted to Allah. The Koran is evidently 
his work, and, read wisely, has quite an interesting story to 
tell. Any careful student of the life of Mohammed from a 
scientific standpoint will reach the conclusion that he was 
seriously afflicted with epilepsy, and had visions, which he 
honestly believed were revelations from Allah. In fact, when 
he was a devoted prophet and communing with Allah, who is 


402 


MACROCOSMUS 


prepared to say that he failed to receive divine truths from 
the Supreme? When, however, he determined to adopt the 
sword as the principal means of converting the people to 
Allah, he became a fallen prophet. While Islam contained a 
number of universal principles, and in many ways advanced 
civilization, it was, at the same time, so barbarous and licen¬ 
tious that it can not be called a universal religion in the sense 
that Christianity is universal. 

While Islam was so 11011 -progressive, and held on to anti¬ 
quated custom and morality, at the same time it is quite a 
different thing in the hands of Arabs from what it is under the 
control of the Turks. The Arabs produced quite a wonderful 
civilization, and made very important contributions to the 
sciences and the arts. In fact, they were at one time largely 
the teachers of the civilized world. We greatly rejoice that 
General Allenby has, by his daring genius, completely over¬ 
thrown the infamous Turkish Empire, and that the Allies will 
now give liberty to Asia as well as to Europe. Their work, 
however, is not yet completed. 

Israel. Jehovah was the God of Abraham, Isaac and 
Jacob. Even in the days of Abraham, when his religion was 
tribal, Jehovah was the God of Abraham, and the Christ of the 
New Testament declared that Abraham saw Ilis day and was 
glad. 

Through Abraham’s posterity, all the nations of the world 
were to be blessed. Jehovah was the God of the twelve tribes 
of Israel. The great scholar, Max Muller, was certainly cor¬ 
rect in his position that God, in some way, had revealed him¬ 
self to Abraham. Jehovah, by suggestions from within, so 
inspired the great patriarch that he was able to make known 
the will of his God. It is useless to talk about a religion 
at all if you intend to entirely discard the supernatural, 
for religion itself is the inner side of civilization, and per¬ 
tains to the spiritual and not to the material. It looks not 
to the seen, which is temporal, but to the unseen, which is 
eternal. 

When the tribes of Israel were consolidated into the nation, 
then Jehovah became the God of the nation. As Israel had a 
great mission, the prophets determined to keep the nation 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


403 


loyal to its God. The prophets were the greatest teachers and 
preachers of their day, and their inspiration was such that 
they presented great spiritual truths and ethical principles 
that have not been superseded even by the civilization of the 
present age. It is frequently claimed that Israel did not 
believe in the future life, but it is certainly a fact that Abra¬ 
ham looked beyond the transitory things of this world to the 
realities of the great unseen. Job did not expect his vindica¬ 
tion in this life, but in the life beyond. The Hebrew did not 
believe that he would ever be separated from Jehovah, either 
in this life or the life beyond. Daniel taught that the right¬ 
eous would shine as the stars for ever and ever. 

The Universality of Christianity . Christianity is really the 
only religion of the world that possesses universality in the 
highest sense. The spirituality of the kingdom it came to 
establish is entirely unknown to all other religions. The 
founder of Christianity declared that His kingdom was not of 
this world. The sending of the Holy Spirit to convince men 
of sin, righteousness and judgment is entirely peculiar to 
Christianity. No other religion, except Christianity, has ever 
emphasized love as the greatest thing in the world. Chris¬ 
tianity has shown itself so marvelously adapted to all nations 
and races that it is destined to become the religion of all 
mankind. 

Christianity World-wide. Professor Drummond declared 
that if science, by searching, had not found out God, it had 
not found out any other object worthy of worship. Chris¬ 
tianity certainly did find out a God worthy of worship. It 
made known God as the Father of all nations. It made known 
the true God as immanent as well as transcendent. We now 
rejoice that religion is becoming more scientific and science is 
becoming more religious. 

There are only four religions that now pretend to dispute 
with Christianity the conquest of the world, and their pros¬ 
pects become less bright from decade to decade. Confucius 
and Buddha are gradually being dimmed by the greater light 
of the world, and Hinduism and Mohammedanism are rapidly 
losing their leadership in Asia as well as Hurope. Turkey, 
the last great Mohammedan power, has been completely crushed 


404 


MACROCOSMUS 


in the great World War. After all, the Turks have become 
quite aggressive. 

Christianity has certainly been world-wide in its results. 
Dr. Edward Caird, in his “Evolution of Religion,” says: 
‘'The secret of Jesus was the unswerving, uncompromising, 
practical idealism with which He faced the evils of life and 
the darkness of death, and refused to regard them as other 
than weapons in the hands of an omnipotent goodness which, 
in spite of them, and through them, is irresistibly realizing 
its divine purpose.” Professor Kuenen, in his Ilibbert Lec¬ 
tures, claims that if there is no universal. language, there are 
universal religions. We might say that there are inter¬ 
national religions, but Christianity is really the only religion 
that we can properly call universal. Islam made rapid 
progress, but it was by the sword. Islam could only go so 
far, and then all progress stopped 

Mohammed taught some things that were really beneficial 
at their stage of progress, but are now a bar to all advance¬ 
ment. Polygamy, which then elevated the family, is now a 
positive curse. The same thing can be said of slavery. Chris¬ 
tianity possesses elements of universal unity that stimulate 
to the highest civilization the aspiration of all races of men. 
This certainly can not be said of any other religion. 

The Theism of Christianity. The theism of Christianity is 
not only the purest theism in the world, but it has been the basis 
for the universal spread of Christianity. It gives the unifying 
thought to the whole world. The ancient Greek believed in 
the unknown God whom Paul preached at Athens, the God 
whose footprints have been found on the sands of universal 
history. Christ proclaimed the personality, not in any limited 
sense, but in the highest spiritual sense of personality. Science 
teaches the universality of law and God’s immanence in na¬ 
ture; Christianity teaches the universality of God’s love and 
His spiritual omnipresence in both light and life. Even Her¬ 
bert Spencer declared that we have greater evidence of the 
great First Cause than for any other truth whatsoever. 

The author became acquainted with Dr. John Henry 
Barrows at the World’s Parliament of Religions in Chicago, 
and became much interested in his work. In his book entitled 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


405 


“Christianity the World Religion,'' we have the following 
significant language: “Back of this localization of Deity, back 
of all these visible manifestations, was the infinite One, whom 
the heaven of heavens can not contain, whose children were to 
be the spiritual followers of that Abraham who believed in 
God and was accepted of Him, before one altar had been 
piled at Shecliem or Bethel, and when Canaan was no more 
sacred than the unpierced wilds of America. To this higher 
truth Israel was blind; to this higher truth the Christian 
world has sometime been blind, having fallen from the heighth 
of the Master’s teachings. But if the early proclamation of 
the gospel meant anything in the realm of theism, it meant the 
bringing home to men’s hearts the spiritual truths and forces 
which came from the teaching, the person and the work of 
Christ. It meant the truth that God is love, that God is 
light, that God is spirit. Christianity in its purity has held 
the human heart and mind to the great truths which make 
spiritual worship possible, and which make idolatry a degrada¬ 
tion of man’s nobler self.” Again, Dr. Barrows says: “The 
redeeming mercy which Christianity associates with His dis¬ 
closures of God, reaches to the life immortal. It illuminates 
the darkness of the grave with the light which neither Buddha, 
Confucius, Mohammed, nor any Hindu seer or poet, ever held 
in his hands, and it makes immortality, the power of an end¬ 
less life, an uplifting, inspiring, purifying, comforting, re¬ 
straining force in the sorrowing and tempted life which men 
live to-day.” 

THE CHRIST OF CIVILIZATION. 

The author has long been interested in the writings of 
Dr. De Pressense, the noted French statesman and theologian. 
In his work entitled “Ancient World and Christianity,” 
we read as follows: “The Deliverer is at length come!—He 
for whom the old Chaldean was yearning when, with terror- 
stricken conscience, he used the incarnation of his seven 
demons, and, weeping for his sins, called upon a God whom 
he knew not. The Deliverer is come, whom Egypt foresaw 
when she spoke in words which she understood not of a God 
who was wounded in all the wounds of the people. The 


406 


MACROCOSMUS 


Deliverer is come, for whom the Magi strained their eyes, 
looking for a Saviour greater than Zoroaster. The Deliverer 
is come, for whom the India of the Vedas panted when she 
was lifted for a moment above her pantheism by the intui¬ 
tion of a holy God—one who could satisfy the burning 
thirst for pardon which none of the springs of her own re¬ 
ligion would avail to quench. The Deliverer is come, the 
true Son of God, who alone can lead mankind to battle with 
full assurance of victory; the God whose image, dimly dis¬ 
cerned, had floated in fantastic incarnations through the 
waking dreams of the Brahman. The Deliverer is come!—He 
who can have compassion on the sufferer, and on all who are 
desolate and oppressed, without plunging Himself and the 
whole world into the Buddhist sea of Nirvana. The Deliverer 
is come!—He whom Greece had prefigured at Delphi and at 
Eleusis—the God who saves because He also has suffered. 
The Deliverer is come!—He who was foretold and fore¬ 
shadowed by the holy religion of Judea, which was designed 
to free from every impure element the universal aspiration 
of mankind.” 

At the great Congress of Religions in Chicago, not a critic 
found any fault with the character of Christ. Even the 
character and motives, as well as the religion, of Confucius, 
Buddha and Mohammed were criticized, but all appeared to 
look upon the Christ as faultless. No one could convict Him 
of sin. He towered above all other religious leaders as a 
great mountain towers above the sea. The great Hindoo 
reformer, Keshub Chunder Sen, rejoiced that Jesus the 
Christ was an Asiatic. Mozoomdar graphically pictures the 
Oriental Christ, but the real fact is, He was neither Oriental 
nor Occidental. He is the universal Christ, and the Light 
of the whole world. Renan, the great French critic and 
skeptic, declared that the Christ was superior to His dis¬ 
ciples, and not created by them. The learned Dr. Channing 
uses these suggestive words: “All admit, and joyfully admit, 
that Jesus, by His greatness and goodness, throws all other 
human attainments into obscurity.” Matthew Arnold criti¬ 
cized both the Bible and the church, but not the Christ. He 
called Jesus the living bread. 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


407 


CHRISTIANITY AND HISTORY. 

“The whole substance and meaning of religion—life in 
God, the forgiveness of sins, consolation in suffering—she 
(the church) couples with Christ’s person; and, in doing so, 
she associates everything that gives life its meaning and its 
permanence, nay, the Eternal itself, with an historical fact, 
maintaining the indissoluble unity of both. ’ ’—Harnack, 
“Christianity and History.” 

In an educational tour through Europe in 1907, we 
visited the beautiful city of Cologne on the Rhine. My wife 
and I spent some time in studying the great cathedral. It 
is the finest Gothic building in the world, and its great archi¬ 
tect began work on it in the twelfth century. Its history 
quite well illustrates the history of Christianity. When Ger¬ 
many became united, the people demanded the completion of 
this great Gothic wonder. Dr. Barrows truly says: “And 
so Christianity is a structure to which all beauty belongs, 
as well as all massiveness—a structure crowned with the 
cross and adorned within and without with images of saint¬ 
hood and blazonries of unmatched historic devotion and 
achievement. It is a sacred edifice which shelters and illus¬ 
trates the chief historic development of mankind; it is itself 
the story of man’s redemption, through divine mercy; and 
it alone points with sure promise to the house not made 
with hands, eternal in the heavens.” Christianity is the 
only religion that could be thus symbolized by the Cologne 
Cathedral. 

Islamism is quite well represented by the mosque, 
Buddhism by the pagoda, Hindooism by the temple hewn 
out of the solid rock; but Christianity alone is the only his¬ 
toric religion which really represents the whole life of 
man; the only temple of faith which symbolizes the whole 
story of redemption. 

I fully believe in constructive criticism, but destructive 
criticism too frequently moves with an Ishmaelitish aggres¬ 
siveness and iconoclastic zeal. Mr. Balfour thus speaks: “It 
has been a great, though common, error to describe these 
learned efforts as examples of unbiased application of his- 


408 


MACROCOSMUS 


toric methods to historic documents. It will be more cor¬ 
rect to say that they are endeavors, by the unstinted em¬ 
ployment of an elaborate, critical apparatus, to force the 
testimony of existing records into conformity with theories, 
on the truth or falsity of which it is not for philosophy nor 
history to pronounce.” 

Historic Christianity is founded upon the great facts of 
the gospel. Upon these facts even Strauss admitted that the 
church was built. The sublime Plato calmly said: “We will 
wait for one, be it a God or God-inspired man, to teach us 
religious duties.” Dr. Whately affirmed that the life of 
Bonaparte contained as many apparent improbabilities as 
the life of Christ. We might say the same thing in reference 
to the recent career of General Allenby in conquering the 
Turkish Empire. While the life of Christ was superhuman, 
there was nothing unnatural when we consider His special 
endowment. God endowed Him with the Holy Spirit above 
all others. The historian Neibuhr declared that the super¬ 
human works of Christ must be conceded. The great 
rationalist Keim positively asserted that Christ undoubtedly 
appeared to His disciples after His death. We thus prove, 
by the greatest of skeptics, that Jesus was certainly above the 
ordinary laws of nature. 

THE BIBLE AND CIVILIZATION. 

‘ ‘ Institutions not only grow, but decay also, and decay, as 
growth, is a process of evolution. Gothic art is evolved out 
of something simpler, but it is not, therefore, superior to it. 
The Roman Empire was evolved out of the Roman Republic, 
and was morally a degeneration from it. The polytheism of 
Virgil is not better, as a religion, than that of Homer; the 
polytheism of the late Brahmanism is certainly worse than 
that of the earlier periods. Therefore, to say that the only 
evolution in religion, except that of the Bible, is an evolu¬ 
tion of error, may be quite true and yet not show that the 
idea of evolution is applicable to heathen religions. Their 
evolution may well have been, from the religious point of 
view, one long process of degeneration. Progress is certainly 
as exceptional in religions as in anything else, and Avhere it 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


409 


takes place must be due to exceptional causes.”— F. B. Jevon’s 
Introduction to the “History of Religion,” 

Professor Blackie, of the University of Edinburgh, has 
described the Bible as a library of books with a backbone of 
history and biography of the highest type, reaching over a 
period of more than three thousand years. The Bible is the 
Book pre-eminent that ministers to the spiritual nature of 
man as well as to the intellectual. The character of the Bible 
as a civilizing influence makes it natural that it should be the 
first work to appear from the printing-press. Carl Ritter, 
one of the greatest modern geographers, made no mistake 
when he acknowledged that without the Bible he could not 
have written his great work. At the great Parliament of Re¬ 
ligions in Chicago, it was very refreshing to hear Prof. George 
S. Goodspeed declare to the great assembly that the religion 
which fulfilled the truths of all the rest would be the religion 
of mankind. Dante was devoted to Virgil, Alexander slept 
with the “Iliad” under his head, Petrarch wept because he could 
not read “Homer” in Greek, but thousands of our soldiers in 
the great World War died for the high ideals taught them from 
the Bible, and they were inspired with a high conviction of the 
realities of the future life. A great writer has said that, 
when the Bible is translated into another language, it is like 
running a railroad through the intellect of that nation. Dr. 
Robertson Smith, the prince of higher critics, has said: “We 
have no need to go outside of the Bible history to learn any¬ 
thing about God and His saving will towards us.” 

The Bible has always shown its perfect adaptation to man. 
The early books of the Bible represent the childhood of the 
race, and are as perfect for their stage of progressive develop¬ 
ment as those written later. They are the foundation with¬ 
out which the marvelous structure of revelation could not 
stand. Not only is this true, but the earlier revelation is 
necessary in order to a proper understanding of the later. 
The Old Testament is certainly important in order to a fuller 
understanding of the New. The critical Ewald declaied that 
the New Testament contained all the wisdom of the world, and 
Sir William Jones, the great Orientalist, affirmed that the 
Bible contains more true sublimity, more real beauty, more 


410 


MACROCOSMUS 


important history and finer poetry than any other work in 
the history of the world. No other literature is comparable 
with it in influencing the progress of civilization. 

God and Creation . In creation, God has certainly revealed 
Himself to man. This was the childhood of the race, and we 
would naturally expect the Creator to use means suited to 
childhood. The purpose of Genesis is to teach God’s relation¬ 
ship to man, and it was never intended for a text-book in 
geology or astronomy. What it teaches in science is simply 
incidental. The Bible is to guide us in the way to heaven, in¬ 
stead of teaching us how the heavens go. 

Genesis is free from those polytheistic errors of other 
early accounts of creation. Many of them it is scarcely possi¬ 
ble to read, without a sense of horror. But Genesis clearly 
points to supreme intelligence as responsible for the creation 
of the heavens and earth. John Stuart Mill wisely said: “It 
must be allowed in the present state of our knowledge that 
the adaptations in nature afford a large balance of probability 
in favor of creation by intelligence.” Prof. John Tyndall 
gives his own experience as follows: “I have noticed, during 
years of self-observation, that it is not in hours of clearness 
and vigor that the doctrine of material atheism commends 
itself to my mind; that in hours of stronger and healthier 
thought it ever dissolves and disappears, as offering no solu¬ 
tion of the mystery in which we dwell and of which we form 
a part.” 

Genesis teaches the law of progressive development as well as 
geology. It begins with the lowest form of life and progresses 
up to man. According to the skeptical Professor Haeckel, the 
idea of evolution is impressed upon all. As the language is 
Oriental and highly poetic, we find the word “day” used in 
at least three senses in the first chapter of Genesis. In the 
first place, it represents the light part of day in contrast with 
night, then it represents both the light and darkness, and, 
finally, the whole period of creation is called a day. The six 
days representing periods of time are used very much as we now 
use chapters in a book. Some chapters are longer than others. 
Tt is a significant fact that the leading geologists and astrono¬ 
mers have never found any serious fault with the Book of 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


411 


Genesis. Such, for example, as Dana, Guyot, Dawson, Hull, 
Stokes, Lockyer, Les Cont, and, in fact, nearly all the great 
scientific thinkers, even many who have been skeptically in¬ 
clined. It is only the contradictionists, who are constantly 
searching for all minute faults, who give any trouble. 

Those who admit that supreme intelligence created the 
heavens and earth by evolution, or any other process, need 
give themselves no more trouble about the supernatural. It 
is only the atheist who can deny the superhuman. All that 
Hume makes out, in his celebrated essay, is the fact that no 
amount of evidence can prove a miracle to an atheist. Starkie’s 
reply to Hume was complete, and it clearly shows that there 
is more experience in the world than simply that of David 
Hume. Even his own experience was not sufficient to fully 
eliminate at all times every evidence of the existence of God. 
John Stuart Mill declared that, in case you admit the existence 
of a personal God, all rational objection to miracles disappears. 

Bible History in Outline. The Old Testament is in reality 
a pictorial representation of the divine plan of redemption. 
According to Dr. Pinches, of the Royal Asiatic Society, and 
other distinguished Oriental scholars, Abraham was called 
from his home among the Chaldeans to be a missionary of 
true monotheism in the great west. According to Max 
Muller, the very greatest of Orientalists, God had in some 
way revealed Himself to Abraham. Our Bible was not given 
all at once, or by a Zoroaster or a Confucius, but it discloses 
a divine superintendence in the historical progress of Abra¬ 
ham 's posterity. The great works of the Hebrews were in¬ 
timately related to the final elevation of the Gentiles. In 
Gen. 28: 14, God’s promise is thus stated: 1 ‘ In thee and in thy 
seed shall all families be blessed.” God thus reveals Him¬ 
self to the great missionary whom he had chosen. It was 
Jehovah's purpose to educate the human race for the final re¬ 
ception of the great Deliverer. 

According to Carlyle, history is largely made up of biog¬ 
raphy, and this is certainly true of Bible history. In 1 Cor. 
10:1-22, Paul illustrated his theme by what he called en- 
samples of Old Testament history. Moses is the great leader, 
called of God to free his people from Egypt, and conduct them 


412 


MACROCOSMUS 


to the borders of Canaan. Israel, a typical nation, was bap¬ 
tized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and the 
spiritual rock of which they drank was Christ, and the bread 
of which they ate was likewise spiritual—it was the bread of 
life. Moses established the Passover and other institutions 
that foreshadowed the mission of the Messiah. From these 
institutions Leslie built up a powerful argument against the 
deists, which they never answered. He showed clearly that 
these institutions pointed to facts and continue to do so to 
the present time. We can illustrate by our Fourth of July. 

John Bright declared that he would stake the whole ques¬ 
tion of a divine revelation upon the Book of Psalms. The 
most extreme of the critics acknowledge a large number of 
the' Psalms to be Davidic. David was Israel’s greatest king, 
and the New Testament writers quote these Psalms as clearly 
pointing to the Messiah. In fact, two of them are quoted on 
the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was sent to the 
apostles in harmony with the promise of the Christ. Nearly 
all the serious objections to the Bible can be traced back to 
Thomas Paine’s “Age of Reason.” Professor Watson, of the 
University of Cambridge, England, made an unanswerable 
reply to Paine, in which he clearly demonstrated the fact that 
every objection urged to the system of revelation could like¬ 
wise be urged to the system of nature. If God has spoken 
through nature, lie has also spoken through revelation. 

The skeptical historian, Edward Gibbon, endeavored to ex¬ 
plain the progress of Christianity from natural causes alone, 
and Professor W T atson made a powerful reply to Gibbon’s 
positions. Briefly 1 will endeavor to establish the inspiration 
on the part of the apostles from the statements of Mr. Gibbon 
himself. The following are his reasons for the rapid growth 
of Christianity: 

1. The zeal of the early Christians. This is in their favor 
and not against their inspiration. 2. The doctrine of a future 
life. This shows that they had been with Jesus and received 
His inspiration. 3. The union of the disciples. This is what 
Jesus taught them. 4. The virtues’ of the early Christians. 
They had studied under the great Teacher. 5. The super¬ 
natural gifts of the early church as believed by the apostles. 


GOD IN HISTORY AND CIVILIZATION 


413 


After His resurrection arid ascension, the Christ sent the Holy 
Spirit on the day of Pentecost. We will now make Mr. Gibbon 
testify to the high spiritual gifts of the apostles. He plainly 
states that the primary cause of the rapid progress of Chris¬ 
tianity was the doctrine itself and the ruling providence of its 


author. Even according to Mr. Gibbon, the Christianity of 
the Bible is certainly divine. 

The Messianic Ideal. Dr. Charles A. Briggs, of the Union 
Theological Seminary, New York, probably the greatest 
Hebrew scholar this country has ever produced, has written 


a book entitled Messianic Prophecy, ’ ’ and in this work he 
clearly shows that the prophecy and typology of the Old 
Testament clearly foreshadow the coming of the Christ. 
While he is the most distinguished of the higher critics, he 
clearly proves that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah of the 
Hebrew prophets. Organic evolution was fulfilled in the first 
man, and then evolution was reaching for the perfect man. 
This man it found in the Christ of the New Testament. Adam 
was a type of Christ, or, as Paul puts it, the figure of Him 
who was to come. The Messianic ideal is continued in Noah, 
Abraham, Moses, David and the prophets. George Adam 
Smith, of Scotland, the greatest of European Hebrew scholars, 
has written one of the greatest works on Isaiah that has ever 
been written. He positively shows that the visions of the 
prophet can only be fulfilled in the Christ. It is needless to 
say that Professor Smith is one of the most noted of the 
higher critics. We may also add that he wrote a work on the 
Minor Prophets, reaching much the same results as in his 
great book on Isaiah. 

During the past century there has been a serious attack 
on John’s authorship of the fourth Gospel, but the following 
distinguished scholars have about settled it in favor of 
John: Prof. Ezra Abbott, Sunday, Ewald, Mayer and Weiss. 
John clearly proves the superhuman mission of the Christ. 
The relentless destructive critic Ewald says that “nothing 
stands more historically certain than that Jesus rose from 
the dead, and appeared again to His followers, and that 
their seeing Him again was the beginning of a higher faith 
and of all their Christian work in the world.” Lord Lyttle- 


414 


MACROCOSMUS 


ton and Gilbert West were skeptics, and one agreed to write 
a book on “The Conversion of Paul,” and the other on “The 
Resurrection of Christ. ’' The result was that Lyttleton was 
convinced that Paul saw his Lord after His resurrection, and 
West was convinced that Jesus rose on the third day, accord¬ 
ing to the Scriptures. 

God is yet in history and civilization. In Isa. 2:4, we 
thus read: “And he will judge between the nations and will 
decide concerning many peoples, and they shall beat their 
swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; 
and nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall 
they learn war any more. ” King Henry of Navarre, who 
became King Henry IV. of France, advocated a league of 
nations. It is now proper that such a league should be signed 
in Paris, France, the capital of one of the greatest republics 
in the world. Please read with much care the following: 

A LEAGUE OF NATIONS OR RUIN. 

“We simply can not bear to think of making a peace, how¬ 
ever just a peace, and then leaving the nations, after a period 
of exhaustion, to watch one another with the old jealousy, 
and build up armaments, the one against the other, with more 
than the old lavishness of expense, and a scientific ingenuity 
sharpened tenfold by experience, and form alliances as of old, 
one against another, until another world war breaks out. If 
this be all that can be looked for, I say, despair possesses us. 
Nothing less confronts us as the inevitable issue than the ruin 
of a civilization which it has taken so many centuries to build 
up, both its economic ruin and the ruin of its culture and its 
freedom. I suppose that it is this dread that has made the 
greatest practical statesmen in many countries propound and 
support a project which seems, to vulgar eyes, so idealistic as 
the ‘League of Nations.’ It does demand a vast change of 
mind in the sentiment of nations towards one another. But 
our practical statesmen recognize that nothing else than such 
a world-wide repentance can save the situation from ruin.”— 
Bishop Gore, of Oxford. 


CHAPTER V. 

The Geographical March of Civilization. 

It is a fact worthy of note that the highest civilizations 
attained by man at different periods of his history, did not 
succeed each other at the same places, but passed in a certain 
order from one country to another. This we call the “Geo¬ 
graphical March of Civilization.” 

The Garden of Eden greatly differed from our conception 
of a garden. It included all that part of Asia that constituted 
the cradle of civilization. This is made evident in the state¬ 
ment that the Tigris and the Euphrates flowed through it. On 
account of the fertility of the valleys of these great rivers, men 
devoted themselves to husbandry, building cities, and cultivat¬ 
ing the arts. They became the centers of fixed habitations. 
The traditions of the Chinese place their ancestors upon the 
table whence the great rivers flow. 

The term “Turanian” has been employed to represent the 
races not belonging to either the Semitic or Aryan races. While 
it is very general, it is probably the best thing we can do in the 
present condition of the science of ethnology. The Turanians 
long preceded the Semites in the civilization of Mesopotamia. 
In fact, Turanian races appear to have spread over a large part 
of the earth in advance of the Semites and Aryans. The black 
division of Turanians appears to have carried civilization to a 
certain point, and there stopped. So the yellow division took 
up the work where these stopped, and carried it to the extent 
of their capacity, and then left civilization to be pushed forward 
by more aggressive races. 

We will now endeavor to show what contribution the 
Turanian races made to civilization in the valleys of the Tigris 
and the Euphrates. The period of infancy has passed, and 
these Mongolians are the childhood races of mankind. As the 
child is moved by impulse and not by judgment, begins many 
things, but completes but few, so we find the same thing true 
with the races we are now considering. (1) They developed 
language from the monosyllabic to the agglutinative stage. 

415 


416 


MACROCOSMUS 


They were the inventors ol* the cuneiform system of waiting. 
This was a very important step in the progress of civilization. 
It might be well to state that in Turanian writing there are 
signs for the precious metals, gold and silver. (2) In many 
cases, these Turanian tribes had become a confederation. This 
is shown in the fact that the commander-in-chief of the 
Semitic forces had an Accadian title. The Rab-sha-keh, or 
prime minister, was of Accadian origin. (3) It appears that 
monogamy was largely practiced by the Accadians. From 
Chaldean records, it appears that the Turanian Accad could 
form a legal marriage with but one wife. The joint family 
appears to have been quite w r ell developed among them. (4) 
They made some advancement in science, particularly in 
astronomy. (5) Commerce, law and civil institutions had 
made some progress among them. This was particularly true 
of the Hittites. They used silver as the standard of value, 
and, if they had lived in this age, they certainly would have 
voted for Mr. Bryan. The Hittite had possession of the land 
of Canaan in the days of Abraham, and Genesis represents 
him as moving among the more settled tribes. The Hittites 
were strong enough at one time to invade even Egypt itself. 

Almost any ethnologist would name China as the most 
striking development of culture among the yellow races. 
Between two and three thousand years B. C., these Mon¬ 
golians reached the rich valleys of China. The geographical 
location of China was exactly suited to the development of a 
unique civilization. These invaders soon cleared the ground 
and fitted it for cultivation. They dug canals, drained the 
marshes, burnt the jungles, and, in fact, did for China what 
their kindred did in lower Chaldea. There appears to have 
been twelve of these earl} 7 tribes, each of which was under its 
own chief. The government was a confederacy of these 
twelve tribes, at the head of which was an elected chief, known 
afterwards as the celestial one, or emperor. 

Many seem to regard the inhabitants of the Celestial Empire 
as almost totally ignorant of those things which characterize 
civilized nations; yet there are some things which we call 
great inventions that were known in China more than two 
thousand years ago. The canal is considered one of the great 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 


417 


inventions of modern times, yet canals intercepted all parts 
of China long anterior to the time they were known in Europe. 
One of the most important mechanical inventions of modern 
times is the artesian well, but the very best authorities claim 
that such wells were sunk to a great depth at a very early 
antiquity to obtain salt water. 

The great religious teacher in China, for more than two 
thousand years, has been Confucius. A people should not be 
called barbarians who have produced so great a teacher as 
was this sage. He taught some things that it would be well 
for us to observe, even in this age. “To rule with equity,” 
says he, “is like the North Star, which is fixed, and all the 
rest go around it.” This is a rule that it might be well for 
even higher civilized races to learn. Confucius had some idea 
of the existence of the Supreme Being, for he says: “Worship 
as though the Deity were present.” “If my mind is not en¬ 
gaged in my worship, it is as though I worshiped not.” Con¬ 
fucius certainly looked forward to the coming of a greater 
teacher than himself, when he said: “In the west the true 
Saint must be looked for and found.” If, according to the 
Christian Fathers, the Greek sages were schoolmasters to lead 
men to Christ, I regard Confucius as a schoolmaster to point 
his millions of pupils to the true western Saint. See the 
author’s “Struggles and Triumphs of the Truth.” 

The Chinese have carried civilization as far as the Tura¬ 
nian races are capable of carrying it, and they must now accept 
the civilization of higher races, or disappear from the pages 
of history. The Japanese are frequently referred to as an 
example of the capacity of the Mongolians for the highest 
civilization. It must be remembered that they have accepted 
the civilization of the western world, and if China will do the 
same thing, she will be fully as prosperous as Japan. 

There has been much discussion among ethnologists in 
reference to the race relationship of the ancient Egyptians, 
but I feel quite well convinced that the early Egyptians be¬ 
longed to the same Turanian family as the early settlers of 
lower Chaldea. Even before the dawn of history, we find a 
large population of nomadic tribes in southwestern Asia, 
which tribes doubtless belonged to some branch of the Turani 


418 


MACROCOSMUS 


ans. Such tribes would certainly pass across the Isthmus of 
Suez, and take possession of the delta and the rich valley of 
the Nile. The geographical location of Egypt exactly suited 
it to the development of just such a civilization as we find 
upon the banks of the Nile. 

It is proper, here, to mention some of the contributions of 
ancient Egypt to civilization. (1) Ancient Egypt made im¬ 
portant scientific contributions to civilization. The Egyptians 
knew the length of the year and the form of the earth. They 
could calculate the eclipses of the sun and moon, and they 
had some acquaintance with geometry, chemistry, medicine 
and anatomy. (2) In art, especially, the Egyptians made 
very important contributions to civilization. The great 
pyramids are yet the wonder of the world. Their paintings 
reveal such progress in the arts of civilization as to astonish 
all students of archaeology, and to show how few new things 
indeed there are under the sun. (3) The Egyptians were 
great inventors, and thus advanced civilization. Many in¬ 
ventions, supposed to be modern, were known to the Egyptians. 
The following we may safely mention: Enameling, glass, 
false gems, mosaics. No nation has ever surpassed them in 
recording all human events and transactions. It is thought 
by leading Egyptologists that they understood the use of the 
magnifying-glass. This seems evident from the fact that the 
microscope has now to be used to make out some of their 
delicate art combinations. (4) The Egyptians made important 
contributions towards the organization of the nation. The 
different tribes became united under the most powerful tribe, 
and thus formed a confederation. The leader of the confedera¬ 
tion became the ruler over all Egypt. (5) The Egyptians 
advanced civilization in making important contributions to re¬ 
ligion. Moses was educated in Egypt, and was thus prepared 
for the great mission before him. Egypt was one of the 
earliest nations to attain to monotheism. 

The Semitic races took up civilization at the point where 
the Turanian races stopped. The Semitic races included the 
Arabians, the Assyrians, the later Babylonians, the Arameans, 
the Phoenicians and the Hebrews. The modern enumeration 
of Semitic races differs somewhat from the tenth chapter of 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 41 ( J 

Genesis, but the author of Genesis doubtless had in view 
geographical neighborhood, while the modern enumeration is 
that of linguistic affinity. 

It is now well agreed among scholars that Arabia was the 
cradle of this race. From this isolated land, the Semitic 
peoples spread in all directions, till its languages and cus¬ 
toms filled a large portion of both Asia and Africa. It is 
evident, therefore, that Arabia is the best place to study the 
early civilization of the Semites. The Arabians continued their 
tribal form of government until their great prophet united 
them into a nation. The Semites surpassed even the Aryans 
in the intensity of their disposition, but were greatly inferior 
in imagination. While they had not the range of ideas of the 
Aryans, they had more thorough and practical application. 
The Semites scarcely had any philosophy, and in religion they 
gave more attention to facts than to ideas. They, therefore, 
carried out their religious ideas to the utmost extent. Moham¬ 
medanism well illustrates this fact. 

At an early period in the history of civilization, we find 
the Semitic peoples in the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates. 
Their civilization is united with, and budded upon, that of 
the early Turanians. Turanian culture became to them very 
sacred, and became a necessary part of their own. In the 
Assyrian Empire, and in the great Babylonian Empire, the 
Semites triumphed over all their enemies. The Assyrian 
rulers extended their dominions in all directions, and became 
the conquerors of the then known earth. They were soldiers 
of the highest order, and the most despotic of rulers. They 
showed great ability, however, in organization, and were great 
builders of cities. Nineveh became one of the most noted 
cities in the world, and it has been a surprise to all modern 
nations. The scholar of the present age takes great delight 
in the study of the ruins of Nineveh. Nineveh was at last 
taken and largely destroyed by Nabopolazzar, one of its own 
generals, who had been sent to subdue a rebellion in Babylonia. 
He united his forces with those of Babylon, and thus became 
too powerful for the remainder of the Assyrian army. The 
great Babylonian Empire was established, and Nebuchadnezzar, 
the son of Nabopolazzar, became the greatest ruler in the 


420 


MACROCOSMUS 


east, and one of the greatest builders of all ages. Babylon 
was the greatest city in the world. 

At a very early period, Semitic tribes conquered the Tura¬ 
nians in Syria. Their relation to that branch of Turanians 
known as Hittites seems to have much the same as that 
of the Semites to the Accadians, in the valleys of the Tigris 
and the Euphrates. Syria became a great country, and in the 
days of the Hadads was the ruler of western Asia. Damascus 
is yet a great city, and one of the oldest in the world. Phce- 
nicia was settled by the Semites about the same time, and 
much in the same way as they settled the country around 
Damascus. Sidon and Tyre became great cities, and, like 
Venice in Italy, or Galveston in Texas, they were built upon 
islands. The people gave special attention to commerce, and 
finally the Phoenicians traversed all parts of the Mediterranean 
Sea. They established trading-posts as far west as Spain, 
and some say even farther. Tarshish, where Jonah wanted to 
go, was a trading-town on the coast of Spain. The Phoenicians 
became the great traders of the world, and they manufactured 
a purple that has been the wonder of the world. They were 
great colonizers, and built the city of Carthage on the north 
coast of Africa, which city disputed with Rome the sovereignty 
of the world. Hannibal was the greatest general in ancient 
times, and, had he been properly supported at home, would 
doubtless have destroyed Rome. 

The Hebrews were of Chaldean origin, and the descen¬ 
dants of Abraham, who had been called of God while in Ur 
of the Chaldees. The great scholar, Max Muller, claims that 
Hebrew history can only be understood on the hypothesis that 
God called Abraham. It is certain that the Hebrews held to 
and developed the monotheistic idea as did no other peoples. 
M. Renan says: “The Indo-European race, distracted by the 
variety of the universe, never, by itself, arrived at monotheism. 
The Semitic race, on the other hand, guided by its firm and 
sure insight, instantly unmasked divinity, and without re¬ 
flection or reasoning attained the purest form of religion 
humanity has known.” Facts clearly show that none of the 
Semitic nations attained to this monotheism, except the Isra¬ 
elites. The Arabs, near relatives to Israel, were divided be- 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 


421 


tween a worship like that of Babylon and Sabaeism, or star- 
worship. While all the Semitic families believed in a God 
back of their minor deities, their monotheism was not superior 
to that of the Hindoos. Facts force us to conclude that God 
gave the Hebrews a profound insight into the truth of mono¬ 
theism, that really made them a light among the nations. 
Each nation has, doubtless, in God’s providence had its 
special mission, and the special mission of the Hebrew na¬ 
tion was the highest development of the monotheistic idea 
belonging to the ancient world. The Hebrews were school¬ 
masters to prepare the world for a universal religion. 

It is proper, now, to enumerate the contributions the 
Semitic races have made to civilization. (1) They have, in 
many respects, been successful organizers. While not equal 
to the Aryans, they have made important contributions to 
civilization. The Assyrian, Babylonian and Ottoman Empires 
are sufficient evidence of this fact. (2) While, to some extent, 
deficient in imagination, the Semites have been great builders. 
Nineveh, Babylon and Jerusalem well illustrate this point. 
If lacking in creative art genius, their practical ability enabled 
them to carry to great perfection what they had received from 
others. (3) The Semites were great traders. Phoenician 
ships visited all parts of the then civilized world, and also 
many parts that were not civilized. (4) The Semites were 
great contributors to literature. The Hebrews and Phoeni¬ 
cians afford ample evidence of this fact. The Phoenicians in¬ 
vented the alphabet. (5) The Semites have been the greatest 
religious contributors to civilization. All who have read the 
Old Testament and Koran can testify to this. Even the 
New Testament was enveloped in the Old, and Judaism was 
the most important preparation for Christianity. 

As the Semites took up civilization where the Turanians 
left off, so the Aryans took up civilization where the Semites 
left off. Comparative philology teaches conclusively that the 
languages of the different European peoples are genealogical¬ 
ly related to one another, and that the languages of Persia 
and India also belong to this family. There- has been a good 
deal of discussion as to the early home of this undivided 
Aryan race, and some able critics have taken the ground that 


422 


MACROCOSMUS 


Europe was their early home. The position of Prof. Max 
Muller, that the original home of this race was the high table¬ 
land of Asia, has not been substantiated by sufficient evidence. 
The authorities now seem to be pretty well agreed that the 
original home of this race was the great plains north of the 
Black Sea, the Caspian, and the Sea of Aral. From this cen¬ 
ter they migrated in different directions, some going as far 
as Persia and India. They sought the great river valleys and 
country near the sea. The great water-courses mark the 
geographical march of civilization. 

As the Sanskrit is the oldest sister of the Aryan group of 
languages, we will consider, to some extent, the civilization of 
the Hindus. The Sanskrit consists of a vast logical system 
of grammar, whose equal has never been found. If the 
Greek is superior in rhetoric, the Sanskrit is superior in gram¬ 
mar; if the Greek is the smoother, the Sanskrit is the bolder. 
The Sanskrit, probably more than any other language, reflects 
the internal features of the great Indo-European family. It 
was spoken in India at least fifteen hundred years B. C., 
though it was, doubtless, in a rude state. It was developed 
by use in sacred literature, until it acquired that degree of 
polish and flexibility which we find in the Ramayana and 
Mahabharata. This was the golden age of Hindoo literature, 
and it is thought by authorities that it ended with the 
seventh century B. C. The mixture of different races, re¬ 
sulting from political convulsions, was the principal cause of 
the decay of the Sanskrit language. 

The w r ord ‘‘Sanskrit” means perfected; it was so called be¬ 
cause the Hindus believed their language to be perfect. In 
Ben fey’s Sanskrit grammar, the alphabet is called Devanagari, 
which means “writing of the gods. 7 7 The Hindus then believed 
their language to be of divine origin. The Sanskrit alphabet 
consists of fifty letters, of which sixteen are vowels and thirty- 
four consonants two accessory twigs serving to enrich and 
modify the language. By different combinations of these 
letters, a great variety of thought is clearly and symmetrically 
expressed. Its declension consists of three genders, three 
numbers and eight cases; its conjugation, of three persons, 
six lenses and six moods. The Sanskrit is richly endowed 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 


423 


with monosyllabic notes, and it has in it many qualities 
united that belong to the different languages of the Indoo- 
European family separately. 

The Sanskrit is of great importance to both the historian 
and the philologist. It throws much light upon the early civil¬ 
ization of the Aryan race. When we find a word common to 
the Latin, the Greek and the Sanskrit, we know that our 
Hindu ancestors attained to the civilization represented by 
the word, but the words in Latin and Greek not found in 
Sanskrit represent a more recent civilization. Take, for 
example, the following words: First, “house” is, in Sanskrit, 
dama ; in Greek, domos ; in Latin, domus ; from this we con¬ 
clude that the early Aryans lived in houses. Second, “boat” 
is, in Sanskrit, nauha; in Greek, naus; in Latin, navis; we 
may, therefore, conclude that the early Aryans had boats. 
The words for masts and sails differ from each other in all 
these linguistic families, and we may from this infer that the 
Aryans before their dispersion went only in boats, with oars, 
on rivers. We might multiply examples, but these are 
sufficient to show the importance of the Sanskrit language to 
the student of Aryan civilization. 

The literature of the Hindus is worthy of very careful 
study. In historical work the Hindus have failed, because 
they have given so much attention to eternity that they have 
lost sight of time. Their absorption into the spiritual and 
invisible has, however, produced a literature which is, in some 
respects, superior to that of any other nation. It is a mis¬ 
take to conclude that all truly classical literature consists only 
of the writings of the Greeks and the Romans. In poetry, at 
least, if not in philosophy, the Hindus were not much behind 
the Greeks. Their poetry, springing from a lively and power¬ 
ful imagination, and inspired by religious doctrines, is em¬ 
bodied in very harmonious and sublime language. 

The Mahabharata has almost as great antiquity as the 
Ramayana. It portrays the greatest Avator of Vishnu, and 
presents a grand picture of the Hindu religion. Tt relates 
especially the wars of the Pandus and the Kurus, two prince¬ 
ly families of the Hindu race. The five sons of Pandus, who 
had been unjustly exiled by their uncle, a usurper of the 


424 


MACROCOSMUS 


throne, return, after many trials and adventures, with a 
powerful army, and, with the assistance of Vishnu, defeat their 
enemies and become the rulers of the country. 

The Vedas, which mean “knowledge" or “science ,” are the 
sacred books of the Hindus. They contain the revelations of 
Brahma which were preserved by tradition, and collected by 
the compiler, Vyasa, about fifteen hundred years B. C. The 
system of religion contained in the Vedas is called Brahmanism. 
It is a system of extreme spiritualism, yet it contains much 
truth. It insists that spirit is one, absolute and infinite; that 
it is the substance underlying all existence. With the Vedas, 
there is something divine in all nature and all life. 

The monuments of India are an evidence of an early and 
very wonderful civilization. Hindu monuments are scarcely 
surpassed by any others in the world. They are divided 
into three classes. The first comprises subterranean temples 
hewn out of solid rock; the second contains those temples hewn 
out in like manner upon the surface, but with portions of 
their structure underground; the third includes those properly 
known as buildings. It appears that they all have a religious 
purpose, being dedicated to Vishnu, Siva or Buddha. 

The temples of the first kind are found in various parts 
of India, and it is probable that all of them have not yet been 
explored. Although the plains of Bengal and other parts of 
the country would not admit of such temples, yet the whole 
peninsula, this side of the Ganges, is traversed by a rocky 
chain, which has not yet been fully explored, but sufficient to 
show that it is favorable to underground temples. There, the 
inhabitants would be protected from the direct rays of the 
sun, and from the impetuous torrents of the rainy season. 
The kind of habitation a man would construct for himself, he 
would also construct for his god; hence, the excavated huts 
of the Hindus were expanded into magnificent temples. It 
appears that the heathen has always been more liberal to his 
god than to himself. How is this with Christians? 

Many visitors have frequented the rock temple in the 
island of Elephanta, near Bombay. This, with its adjacent 
buildings, is entirely hewn out of rock, and, consequently, 
forms a perfect grotto. The temple itself is about 130 feet 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 


425 


in length, and the same in breadth. In front of the principal 
entrance, facing the north, there is an artificial terrace, from 
which there is an extensive oceanic prospect, and on each side 
an opening to admit fresh air. The rock roof of this temple 
is supported by twenty-six pillars. All the adjoining chapels 
of the temple, though not so high, are finished in precisely 
the same way. 

From this temple the following conclusions can be safely 
drawn: (1) That the representations in the island of Ele- 
phanta are taken from Hindu mythology. (2) It appears 
probable that the grotto of Elephanta is dedicated to Siva, 
as all the ornamental designs on the walls either represent 
him in person, or have an allusion to his history, the pre¬ 
vailing idea being to represent him on his throne surrounded 
by his court. (3) It is evident that the worship of Siva was 
in high repute when these temples were excavated. (4) The 
Hindus must have been in possession of the best of metals, 
or they never could have hewn grottoes into clay-porphyry, 
the hardest of stone. 

Grotto temples, similar to those described, are found in the 
island of Salsette, which is also opposite to Bombay, and near 
Elephanta. In number and size, the temples of Salsette are 
superior to those of Elephanta. The lofty mountain which 
this island contains is also composed of the hardest rock, yet 
it is excavated in every direction. A distinguishing feature 
of the temple grottoes of Salsette are the inscriptions on the 
walls. Antiquarians are yet in doubt as to their full mean¬ 
ing. The principal grotto is 126 feet long and 64 feet broad; 
the roof is vaulted and supported by pillars, and terminates in 
an open chapel, surmounted by a cupola. It appears that the 
temples at Salsette were dedicated to Buddha as well as to 
Siva. Those hostile sects doubtless, at that time, dwelt in the 
same neighborhood. 

The student of Hindu monuments would next study the 
celebrated grottoes of Ell ora. These are hewn into a chain of 
rocky mountains, consisting principally of hard red granite, 
in a horseshoe form, with a distance of nearly five miles 
between the extreme points. Some of these temples are three 
stories in height. 


426 


MACROCOSMUS 


From them, however, we may draw the following con¬ 
clusions: (1) They represent the most flourishing period of 
Hindu art. Everything in them wears an Indian character; 
no foreign admixture either of art or mythology. They must, 
therefore, belong to a period when the people were free from 
a foreign yoke. (2) In the temples of Elephanta and Salsette, 
the prevailing creed appears to have been that of Siva, and 
next to that, Buddha. They must, therefore, have been ex¬ 
cavated prior to the time of the expulsion of the Buddhists 
from India. But the temples of Ellora betray not the slight¬ 
est symptoms of the worship of Buddha. From this fact it 
seems evident that at this period the Buddhists had been 
driven from India. (3) It appears that at the time of the 
construction of the temples of Ellora, Hindu mythology had 
attained its full and perfect development. On the walls of 
Ellora there are verses taken from the great Hindu poems, 
the Ramavana and the Mahabharata. 

These great monuments are the outgrowth of the religious 
nature of man. They show the longing, on the part of 
humanity, to know something of the nature of God. Man 
naturally asks the question, Who made the great universe? 
As it could not make itself, God must have made it. We 
have seen in the Hindus sufficient evidence of the capacity of 
the Aryan race. 

At this time we will only add a few words in reference to 
the European Aryans. The Greeks appear to have been en¬ 
dowed with faculties of a superior order; and their geographi¬ 
cal position was such that they developed the very highest 
civilization. In fact, modern civilization is indebted to Greek 
initiative for almost everything accomplished in science, 
philosophy and art. The Romans were great imitators, and 
largely borrowed their civilization from the Greeks. In the 
department of law, however, Rome was original, and has 
largely been the teacher of the modern world. Aryan civil¬ 
ization has passed over from Europe to America, and in North 
America, in particular, it has certainly found a congenial 
home. In the geographical march of civilization, America 
appears to be the terminal point, and now Aryan civilization 
in America is passing over the Pacific Ocean and reaching 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OP CIVILIZATION 


427 


the Mongolian race in China and Japan. Aryan civilization 
is now not only aggressive, but also missionary. Its purpose 
clearly seems to be the elevation of the inferior races. 

We conclude this part of this chapter by giving some of 
the contributions of the Aryan race to civilization. (1) The 
Aryan race has made the greatest contributions to literature. 
The Hindus and Greeks among the ancients and modern 
European writers sufficiently illustrate this point. (2) The 
Aryans have made the greatest contributions to art. The 
Hindus, Greeks and Italians afford sufficient evidence of this 
fact. (3) The Aryans have carried commerce to its highest 
point. • Great Britain is a perfect illustration of this. (4) 
The Aryans have taught the world the great lesson of local 
self-government as no other race ever taught. (5) The Aryans 
have been the greatest missionaries of the world. Paul turned 
to the Gentiles, and Christianity very largely became an 
Aryan religion. While it is certainly the religion of all races, 
it is the Aryan race that has disseminated it and made it such. 

GREAT MEN AND THE MARCH OF CIVILIZATION. 

It is difficult to overestimate the influence of great minds 
upon civilization. While the age has much to do in making 
the man, it is certain that the man has also much to do in 
making the age. In this part of this chapter on “The Geo¬ 
graphical March of Civilization,” we will only consider some 
of the great national leaders of the race. 

CONFUCIUS. 

When Chinese civilization is mentioned, we at once think 
of Confucius. For more than two thousand years, he has 
been the center of civilization, so far as the Celestial Empire 
is concerned. This great man was born more than five hun¬ 
dred years before Christ, and, when a little boy, lost his father. 
His mother was intelligent and pious, and took much interest 
in his education. Confucius always felt greatly indebted to 
her influence, and, at her death, even left public service, and 
mourned three years. Her influence, doubtless, had much to 
do with his teachings in reference to the family. It is prob¬ 
able that no nation has ever shown greater reverence for 


428 


MACROCOSM US 


parents than have the Chinese. Confucius was a great teacher, 
and certainly gave his people a very high system of ethics. 
He taught the Golden Rule in a negative form. The follow¬ 
ing is his language: ‘ ‘ Do not unto others as you would not 
have them do unto you." 

Confucius opposed all extremes, and insisted upon the 
“Immutable Mean.” In a few words, he sums up the develop¬ 
ment of his mind: “At fifteen I longed for wisdom. At thirty 
my mind was fixed in the pursuit of it. At forty I saw 
clearly certain principles. At fifty I understood the rule 
given by heaven. At sixty everything I heard I easily under¬ 
stood. At seventy the desires of my heart no longer trans¬ 
gressed the law.” This great man was humble. He said: “I 

t 

can not bear to hear myself called equal to the sages and 
the good. All that can be said of me is, that I study with 
delight the conduct of the sages, and I instruct men without 
weariness therein.” 

It is evident that Confucius has been the central figure 
in the civilization of one-fourth of the human race. If the 
tree is to be judged by its fruit, he has certainly been one of 
the greatest minds of the race. No impostor or ordinary 
man could have accomplished what Confucius accomplished. 
No ignis fatuus could thus illuminate centuries. While Chinese 
civilization is not everything that could be desired, it has 
certainly accomplished much for a large portion of mankind. 
It is too conservative and looks too piuch to the past, but our 
western nations should not be too revolutionary in China. A 
great Chinaman, in a lecture recently delivered in the 
University of Chicago, gives our Christian nations some good 
advice. The west can do much for the Orient if it works 
with the right spirit. China, like Japan, will become pro¬ 
gressive. 

ABRAHAM. 

Abraham was certainly the greatest personality of the 
ancient world. He is called “Father” by Hebrews, Chris¬ 
tians and Mohammedans. The highest civilizations of the 
world delight to do him honor. While M. Renan claimed 
that the source of Hebrew monotheism was to be accounted for 
in a like tendency in the Semitic race, Prof. Max Muller 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 


429 


thought that the true source of this tendency was to be found 
in Abraham himself. He calls attention to the fact that 
both Moses and Christ, and afterwards Mohammed, preached 
no new God, but the God of Abraham. He says: “Thus the 
faith in the one living God, which seemed to require the ad¬ 
mission of a monotheistic instinct, grafted in every member 
of the Semitic family, is traced back to one man.” This 
great Oxford professor claimed that Abraham’s faith in one 
supreme God could only be rationally accounted for on the 
supposition that God revealed Himself unto Abraham. By 
this revelation, he, doubtless, meant an inspired vision of 
truth, that made the existence of God as real to the great 
patriarch as the outward world itself. The profound insight 
of Abraham has not been questioned by Hebrew, Christian 
or Mohammedan. 

Abraham was born more than two thousand years before 
Christ, in Ur of the Chaldees. He became dissatisfied with the 
idolatry of his surroundings, and determined to go to the 
land of Canaan, where he could worship God according to the 
dictates of his own conscience. On account of a famine, he 
visited Egypt, and was, doubtless, better prepared for his 
mission by coming in contact with this high civilization. It is 
thought that he adopted circumcision from Egypt. The 
monotheism of the Egyptians evidently tended to strengthen 
his own faith, although his conception of God was doubtless 
superior to their own. 

It should be remembered that Abraham was at the head 
of a tribe, and not a nation. Stanley thought it perfectly 
proper to call Abraham a Bedouin sheik. The religion of 
Abraham was tribal, and Jehovah was the God of Abraham’s 
tribe. This family God of the great patriarch was the highest 
of all gods, and he was also the God of Isaac and Jacob. 
(Gen. 28:3; 35:11.) Abraham received the promise that 
Jehovah would make of his posterity a great nation, and the 
God of Abraham would, of course, be the God of this nation. 
The promise went even beyond this; for, in Abraham’s pos¬ 
terity, all the nations of the earth were to be blessed. Re¬ 
ligion becomes universal, and the God of Abraham becomes 
the universal God. He is supreme over heaven and earth. 


430 


MACROCOSMUS 


Jesus accused his contemporaries of not being the true 
posterity of Abraham, or they would, in the spirit of Abraham, 
accept the higher revelation which he had brought down 
from God. 

NEBUCHADNEZZAR. 

Nebuchadnezzar was the greatest of Babylonian monarchs, 
and his influence upon civilization was far-reaching. His 
name indicates that he was a worshiper of Nebo, the son of 
Bel-Merodach, and the prophet and god of wisdom. This 
great ruler prided himself upon his knowledge and advance¬ 
ment in culture. He was one of the most progressive of 
rulers. From his father he had inherited the warlike traits 
of one of the greatest of Assyrian generals, and Babylonian 
influence had made him the most cultured of men. Nebu¬ 
chadnezzar was as much the center of culture in his day as 
Louis XIV., of France, was in his. The capital city, Babylon, 
was the most magnificent city in the world. 

This great ruler became king of Babylon, B. C. 604. 
In the lifetime of his father, he had defeated the Egyptians 
in the battle of Carshemish, so graphically described by Jere¬ 
miah, and soon after he became the sole ruler, and conquered 
all western Asia and Egypt. He established one of the very 
greatest empires in the history of the world, and unified the 
nations so far as they could be united at that time. Nebu¬ 
chadnezzar supposed that he was the advance guard in education 
and culture, and that he had a divine mission in this world. 
It is now thought that much of the culture of Egypt and of 
China was borrowed from Babylon. Mr. Lockyer, in his 
“Dawn of Astronomy,” claims that even Egypt borrowed 
the science of astronomy from Babylon in connection with 
temple building. 

Nebuchadnezzar was the most magnificent builder this 
world has thus far known. The great universities of the 
world are now interested in Babylonian exploration and in 
the study of the marvelous remains of this ancient civiliza¬ 
tion. Great scholars devote their lives to the study of Baby¬ 
lonian monuments and civilization. Babylon was called the 
“Golden City.” and its beauty was such that John, in his 
apocalyptic vision, uses it as a model for the New Jerusalem. 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 


Nebuchadnezzar certainly did much towards advancing' the 
fine arts. 

I he great king of Babylon was a religious man, and was 
very zealous in upholding the religions of his country. While 
there were local shrines throughout his great dominions, each 
having its principal deity, it was his purpose to make the state 
religion of Babylon supreme. This he never fully succeeded 
in doing, and it is now thought by the critics that the effort 
made by the last Babylonian monarch to collect all the gods 
in his capital was the principal cause of the overthrow of his 
kingdom. When the great Babylonian Empire went down, 
Bel and Nebo also went down, to rise no more. The world 
had no further need of them, and a higher religion took their 
place. 

CYRUS. 

Cyrus, the founder of the Persian Empire, probably 
reigned from about 558 to 529 B. C. He ruled a large por¬ 
tion of the civilized world, and his influence upon civiliza¬ 
tion was consequently very great. The Aryan race now takes 
the place of the Semitic in an advancing civilization. After 
Cyrus had united the Medes and Persians, they marched 
against the rich kingdom of Lydia. The rich king Croesus 
was taken prisoner when his capital (Sardis) fell. Cyrus next 
marches against the great Babylon, and that mighty empire 
falls before his victorious arms. 

After the capture of Babylon, Cyrus became much in¬ 
terested in Jewish captives, and began to arrange for the 
restoration of the temple and the rebuilding of Jerusalem. 
Evidently, there was much sympathy between the belief of 
Cyrus and the Jewish faith, and the Jews believed that Cyrus 
was an instrument in the hands of God to restore them to 
their own country. The great prophet Isaiah actually calls 
Cyrus a shepherd of the Lord, and Cyrus evidently thought 
that he was doing the will of the great Persian god, Ormazd. 
In the restoration of the Jews, Cyrus was certainly doing 
much towards advancing a higher civilization. The restora¬ 
tion of the temple and the rebuilding of Jerusalem were 
necessary to the fulfillment of Hebrew prophecy in reference 
to the Messiah. The Persians were consequently agents in 


432 


MACROCOSMUS 


carrying forward the will of God. It is also a fact that 
when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, wise men from 
the east, who embraced much the same creed as did Cyrus, 
came to present their beautiful gifts to the Redeemer of the 
world. 

The religion, which Cyrus embraced was a fighting re¬ 
ligion. Ormazd was the god of light, and Ahriman was the 
god of darkness. The mission of Ormazd was to put down the 
god of darkness. The Persians believed that Ormazd would 
finally triumph over all evil. You can thus see that there was 
conscience in the sword of Cyrus; as the representative of 
Ormazd it was his duty to put down all opposing forces. He 
considered himself a missionary of his great god in overthrow¬ 
ing the idolatry of the Babylonians. It is evident that Cyrus 
and his God had in this world a divine mission. AVherever 
the Persian arms triumphed, a purer religion soon prevailed, 
and Cyrus was so much pleased with the Jewish religion 
that he practically identified it with his own. It must also 
be admitted that, after the Jews came in contact with the 
Persians, they did not again relapse into idolatry. Both 
faiths were preparing the world for a. higher religion. 

ALEXANDER. 

Alexander the Great was born 356 B. C. His father 
Philip had conquered Greece, and it is said that the youth¬ 
ful Alexander was fearful lest his father should accomplish 
everything and not leave anything for him to do. After the 
death of Philip, Alexander soon put down a Greek rebellion, 
and then united all Greece against its ancient enemies, the 
Persians. In the three great battles of the Granicus, Issus 
and Arbela, Alexander completely crushed the Persians. AVhen 
the king of Persia proposed to divide Asia with him, the con¬ 
queror responded that as there was but one sun in the heavens, 
so there could be but one ruler over Asia. The Persian Em¬ 
pire had done all it could for civilization, and the time had 
come for it to give way to a stronger power and a higher 
civilization. 

Alexander had been trained in Greek culture by the great 
philosopher Aristotle, and in all his conquests he sent back 


9 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 433 

to Greece what he supposed would be of most interest to his 
great teacher. He was an instrument in the hands of God 
for the dissemination of a higher civilization. Europe now 
guides the destiny of the nations instead of Asia, and this 
means more for the individual and for liberty. Alexander’s 
career certainly forms one of the greatest in the world’s his¬ 
tory. By it, Asia and Europe are united in the progress of 
the race. Universal empire tended to make all acquainted 
with what had been accomplished for civilization by a part. 
The conquests of Alexander rapidly diffused Greek culture 
throughout the Orient. He built Alexandria in Egypt, and 
in all parts of the east he built cities after the Hellenic 
models. These kept alive Greek culture in the east long 
after the downfall of the Macedonian Empire. 

The work accomplished by Alexander can not well be 
understood unless we consider the special mission of the 
Greek race. It appears evident that God intended it to do for 
mankind what no other race could do. When we consider 
the fact that Grecian thinkers were the founders of nearly 
all the sciences we now call modern, we are enabled to form 
some conception of the marvelous intellectual ability of this 
race. The Greek language is considered the most perfect ever 
spoken by man. The historian Kurtz says: “The Greek 
language, which, when the gospel was first preached, was 
understood and spoken throughout the Roman Empire, 
obtained universal dominion—as it were a temporary suspen¬ 
sion, this, of the judgment by which languages were con¬ 
founded. ” As a matter of fact, the preaching and writings 
of the apostles throughout the world were almost entirely in 
Greek. This language is now taught in all the leading 
universities of the world. 


CiESAR. 

According to Mommsen, Julius Cagsar was born 102 B. C. 
As Philip and Alexander destroyed the democracies of Greece, 
so Caesar overthrew the Republic of Rome. It may be that 
these institutions, in both Greece and Rome, had accomplished 
all that they could then accomplish for civilization. Caesar 
evidently represented the popular party against the aristoc- 



434 


MACROCOSMUS 


racy of the Senate. As had no other Roman, he had pushed 
back the borders of barbarism so far that Rome was saved for 
several centuries from invasion from the north. The conquest 
of Gaul has had a lasting influence upon the civilization of 
modern Europe, and also of America. As a matter of fact, 
the very peoples conquered by Cassar are now in the vanguard 
of an advancing civilization. It is probably true that the em¬ 
pire did more to advance the true interest of mankind than the 
republic was capable of accomplishing at that time. The 
writings of Cassar, as well as his marvelous conquests, have had 
an important influence upon the culture of modern times. 
Cassar was the greatest Roman of them all. While Rome 
borrowed her culture from Greece, in the department of juris¬ 
prudence she went far beyond the intellectual Greeks. While 
Rome conquered the world as a savage, she ruled it like a 
sage. It was in the interest of civilization that the empire 
of the Greeks should be swallowed up in the all-embracing em¬ 
pire of Rome. Rome broke down the barriers between different 
races, and facilitated the intercourse of the nations. A 
Roman writer thus speaks of the mission of his race: “It is 
for others to work brass into breathing shape—others may be 
more eloquent or describe the circling movements of the 
heavens and tell the rising of the stars. Thy work, 0 Roman, 
is to rule the nations; these be thine acts, to improve the 
condition of the world's peace, to show mercy to the fallen 
and to crush the proud.” 

The era of peace brought about by the great Roman Em¬ 
pire was especially favorable to the progress of Christianity. 
The world was ruled by the central authorities at Rome, so, 
under Roman protection, witli the universal Greek language, 
the apostles could preach the gospel to all the nations. Roman 
roads radiated from the capital to all nations, and the influ¬ 
ence of the Eternal City was felt at the very finger-tips of 
civilization. Men of all races flowed into the great city, and 
the preaching of Paul, the prisoner, had its influence thou¬ 
sands of miles away. The dominating idea of Roman civil¬ 
ization was law. The Romans have largely been the law¬ 
givers of modern civilization. No one could graduate at a 
law college, in either Europe or America, who had not taken 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OP CIVILIZATION 


435 


a course of study in Roman law. Tlie influence of Roman 
law upon modern civilization has certainly been great. 

CHARLEMAGNE. 

This great ruler of the Middle Ages has wielded a power¬ 
ful influence upon the progress of civilization. It is true that 
his empire afterwards went down, but not without leaving an 
influence for organization that continued long after the death 
of this great ruler. Charlemagne was born A. D. 742, and died 
in 814. After the death of his brother, he inherited the whole 
kingdom of the Franks, and became a much more powerful 
ruler than was his father Pepin. His purpose was to restore 
the AVestern Roman Empire, so he became a great conqueror. 
His wars with the Saxons were cruel and terrible, but he 
finally conquered them for Christianity and civilization. 
Charlemagne thought, at one time, that he would be able to 
restore the Roman Empire by marrying Irene, the Byzantine 
empress, but man proposes and woman disposes. This proj¬ 
ect of the great ruler failed. He could conquer the Saxons, 
but not the heart of woman. 

AVTiile Charlemagne accomplished much in establishing 
law and order in Europe, he did even more for civilization 
as a patron of learning. He became interested in every great 
scholar of his day, and was ever ready to advance learning in 
every way he could. Leading scholars were invited to his 
court, and he was liberal towards their support, especially 
when we consider the age in which he lived. He was the 
great ruler about midway between ancient and modern civil¬ 
ization. 

Charlemagne did much towards advancing commerce and 
education throughout his dominions. He granted special 
privileges to merchants, and reduced as much as possible the 
tolls to which they had been subjected. He established uni¬ 
formity of currency, had the coinage executed in his own 
palace, and regulated the value of both gold and silver. He 
was a bi-metalist, but I do not know that he favored the ratio 
of sixteen to one. This great ruler gave special attention to 
general instruction, and to the revival of classical learning. 
AVliile scholars were invited to his court from all parts of 


436 


MACROCOSM US 


Europe, the Anglo-Saxon, Alcuin, seems to have been his 
favorite. He was the originator of the palatine school, a 
kind of normal school in which men were trained to become 
teachers in different parts of his empire. The different mem¬ 
bers of his family were students, and even Charlemagne 
himself became a student of his favorite scholar. The emperor 
encouraged even the ladies to copy ancient manuscripts, and 
he paid liberally for these copies, thus establishing a library 
in his palace at Aix la Chapelle. He was so much interested 
in learning that he would have some one read to him during 
his meals, and when he could not sleep at night, he would 
arise and spend his time in studying the stars. 

PETER THE GREAT, OF RUSSIA. 

This great ruler to whom Russia largely owes her civil¬ 
ization was born in Moscow in 1672, and died in St. Peters¬ 
burg in 1725. After much opposition and bloodshed, he put 
down all opposition and became the czar of Russia, in harmony 
with the nomination of his predecessors. He at once organ¬ 
ized an army upon new plans, and even entered the ranks 
himself, and gradually went up until he was at the head of 
the army. He required all his nobles to do the same thing, 
and it is not surprising that he soon had an efficient army. He 
saw the necessity of a navy, and employed Dutch and Venitian 
shipwrights to build small vessels for him. In order to learn 
seamanship, he cruised on board Dutch and English ships at 
Archangel, the only seaport that Russia then had. In 1696 
he was successful in taking the Turkish city of Azov, on the 
sea by the same name. In order to improve his semi-barbarous 
people, he entered into communication with western powers, 
at whose courts Russia was not then even represented. 

In 1697 he made a journey which made a new epoch in 
the history of the Russian Empire. He left his own kingdom, 
and spent a year and a half in visiting western nations. He 
went to Amsterdam in disguise, and worked as a common 
shipbuilder. Those associated with him regarded him as a 
common laborer, the same as themselves. Things are not 
always what they seem. While in Amsterdam, he studied 
natural philosophy, astronomy and geography. He even 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 


437 


attended anatomical lectures. Before returning home, he 
visited London, Vienna, and other great cities. He intended 
also to go to Italy, but rebellion in his own dominions hastened 
his return. 

The Russian monarch now had to face one of the most dis¬ 
tinguished warriors of all ages, the celebrated Charles XII., 
of Sweden. This hero has been made famous in a volume by 
Voltaire. While Charles at first defeated the Russians, Peter 
declared that his enemies would finally teach him how to 
defeat them. His prophecy, in this particular, was literally 
fulfilled. In 1709 he defeated Charles XII. at Poltava, and 
the Swedish king was compelled to take refuge among the 
Turks. Charles made the same mistake that Napoleon after¬ 
wards made. In 1703, Peter the Great laid the foundation 
of St. Petersburg, which became one of the most magnificent 
capitals in Europe. Peter paved the streets of St. Peters¬ 
burg and Moscow, and he adorned his capital especially with 
the finest works of art. Two years before his death, he 
founded, at his capital, the Academy of Science. Russia has 
doubtless done much for civilization, but the time will soon 
come when she will either have evolution or revolution in 
favor of popular government. She has had revolution, but 
has not yet a middle class sufficient for popular government. 

NAPOLEON BONAPARTE. 

Napoleon Bonaparte was born on the island of Corsica in 
1769, two months after the conquest of this island by the 
French, and died on St. Helena in 1821. His mother was of 
superior mind, and always had a great influence over him. 
He was educated in military institutions, and thought of 
only a military career. When a boy, he took much interest 
in politics, and was thoroughly in sympathy with the French 
Revolution. He was even accused of being in sympathy with 
the most extreme republican party, but he was really a 
moderate democrat. It can be said in favor of Napoleon, 
that he was a friend to the people even up to his death. He 
was always opposed to aristocracy, and, even when emperor, 
he claimed to fight for liberty, equality and fraternity. When 
on his way to the field of Austerlitz, he would pitch his tent 


438 


MACROCOSMUS 


in the midst of his soldiers, so that he might share privations 
the same as did they. He never had an officer who had come 
up from the ranks to fail him, while those belonging to the 
aristocracy were unsuccessful. If Murat had had the com¬ 
mand of the army that Grouchy kept away from Waterloo, 
Napoleon would again have probably become supreme in 
Europe. Napoleon was the child of the Revolution, and his 
career completely revolutionized Europe. He made the people 
supreme, instead of the aristocracy. 

Napoleon was a great civil ruler, as well as the greatest 
general who ever mustered an army. While his thundering 
legions marched the streets of every capital in Europe, his 
wise laws constantly tended to elevate the common people. 
Under his directions, France received the wisest laws she has 
ever had, and the Code Napoleon yet governs the French 
people. The improvements of Paris which Napoleon began 
have continued, and Paris is now considered the most beauti¬ 
ful city in the world. lie so revolutionized Europe that 
there has been constant progress since. After his banishment, 
the rulers tried to force a reaction, but the people had learned 
too much about liberty and equality not to stand up for their 
rights. Napoleon struck a death-blow to Austrian supremacy in 
Italy, and he prepared the way for a united Italy. The com¬ 
plete humiliation of Austria, by his conquering army, destroyed 
the prestige of that power in Germany, and prepared the way 
for united Germany. Napolen took much interest in education, 
and was anxious for all the people to be educated. He did 
not, however, neglect higher education, but promoted it in 
every way he could. It is surprising that he could inaugurate 
so many reforms while fighting all Europe. France is now 
one of the greatest republics in the world. 

GEORGE WASHINGTON. 

The influence of Washington upon western civilization has 
been greater than that of any other man. This great man was 
born in Westmoreland County, Va., in 1732, and died at Mt. 
Vernon in 1799. With the exception of surveying, his educa¬ 
tion did not go beyond the common-school branches, but he 
did become a very expert surveyor. In fact, it was his pro- 


THE GEOGRAPHICAL MARCH OF CIVILIZATION 


439 


fession, and a good profession, indeed, it was at that time. 
The mother of Washington was a great woman, and she had 
unbounded influence over her illustrious son. While we can 
not rely upon the many anecdotes told in reference to his 
youth, it is evident that he was a boy of great integrity, 
justice and honor, which traits went with him through life. 
Thus was laid in boyhood the foundation of his greatness. 

Washington’s influence in the French and Indian War 
was great, and he certainly did his part towards driving the 
French from America. The triumph of Great Britain in 
North America was an important epoch in the progress of 
civilization. It made America Anglo-Saxon instead of Celtic, 
and Protestant instead of Catholic. If the French had 
triumphed in North America, our history would, doubtless, 
have been very similar to that of South America. The 
triumph of English arms prepared the way for North America 
to become the most enlightened and progressive country in 
the world. 

The Revolutionary War became a necessity. The govern¬ 
ment of George III. was as tyrannical towards the colonies 
as was that of Spain. With his powerful army and navy, he 
thought that the rebellion could be put down in a short time, 
and that the colonies could be used simply to enrich the 
mother country. He found himself greatly mistaken. It is 
doubtful if the Revolutionary AVar could have been carried 
forward to success had it not been for the patience and pru¬ 
dence of Washington. There were constant misunderstand¬ 
ings between the army and Congress, and AA r ashington had 
always to act as mediator. His influence prevented revolt at 
Valley Forge, and the marching of the army upon Congress. 
The success of the Americans taught England a lesson she has 
never forgotten. She altogether changed her plans of deal¬ 
ing with her colonies, and has thus been enabled to build up 
the greatest empire in the world. 

The influence of Washington caused the adoption of the 
Constitution, and his Presidency (two terms) served to hold 
the conflicting elements together. The United States is thus 
one great country, and not divided up into small republics 
as is South America. 












Book VI. 

THE IMPORTANT PROBLEMS OF THE 

GREAT WAR 

SKETCH OF THE GREAT WAR. 

The military activities of the Prussians foreboded the 
great conflict. In 1864, Prussia made war on Denmark, and 
acquired important territory. In 1866 she invaded Austria, 
and separated that country from the rest of Germany. In 1870 
she invaded Prance, took Paris, and established the German 
Empire, and placed herself at the head. 

Bismarck made the empire thoroughly autocratic, and a 
great military propaganda was launched. Leading professors 
of the universities advocated war in order to give Germany 
her true position in the progress of the world. General Bern- 
hardi wrote an able book to show just how Germany could 
wage a successful war, and place herself at the head of 
Europe, if not at the head of the world. So Germany was 
thoroughly prepared for the conflict. 

In August, 1914, the great war began. The great problem 
with Germany was to get a quick decision before Great 
Britain could get ready, but her plans were frustrated by 
the great victory gained over her by Great Britain, France 
and Belgium in the battle of the Marne. In addition to this, 
the Allies blockaded Germany and her allies so completely, that 
it was not broken during the war. The result was that Germany 
lost all of her colonies. General Bernhardi had pointed out the 
fact that in case Germany had to contend with the British 
navy, she might be defeated as was Napoleon Bonaparte. 

Both Germany and Austria had greatly underestimated the 
strength of Russia. When Austria attacked Serbia, the 
Russians began to move, and the Grand Duke Nicholas at 
once showed himself to be one of the greatest generals in Europe. 
If he had been properly supported by the Russian Govern¬ 
ment, he would have gained the battle of Tannenberg, and 

441 


442 


MACROCOSMUS 


consequently could have marched to Berlin and thus ended 
the war. Ludendorff himself clearly shows that Rennenkamp 
held back four hundred thousand Russians when he was only 
opposed by ten thousand Germans, and thus permitted the 
German armies to concentrate against the Russian army at 
Tannenberg, and defeat it. Ludendorff, in his frankness, 
freely admits that this saved the Germans from a disastrous 
defeat. Rennenkamp was afterwards shot by the Russians as 
a traitor. In fact, it appears that the Russian armies were 
full of traitors, and these were in constant communication 
with the Czarina at the palace. She herself was a German, 
and finally suffered the consequences of her misconduct. 
Samsonoff committed suicide after his defeat at Tannenberg. 

In 1916, Great Britain had organized and drilled one of the 
greatest armies in the history of the world. Her vast domin¬ 
ions had to be defended. This same year (1916) Marshal 
Haig fought the “Battle of the Somme,’’ one of the longest 
and most bloody battles of the great war. Ludendorff admits 
that the German army never did fully recover from its 
defeat and losses in this great battle. This battle saved the 
French at Verdun. The German losses in these two great 
battles in 1916 were so great that even Ludendorff began to 
lose hope. When the Italians joined the Allies, the cause of 
the Germans appeared most desperate. The war would soon 
have ended had it not been for fhe many traitors in both 
the Russian and Italian armies. 

The Russian revolution in 1917 took that great country 
out of the war, and it enabled the Germans and Austrians to 
transfer their great armies from the Russian front to both 
the western and eastern fronts. Great Britain w^as left almost 
alone to fight the armies of the central powers in Asia. 
General Allen by, the great English commander, conducted one 
of the most brilliant campaigns in Palestine and Syria ever 
before directed in the east. He completely defeated the cen¬ 
tral powers and put Turkey out of the war. 

It was a great blow to the Allies when Russia went out 
of the war in 1917, but this was fully compensated for when 
America came into the war. The problem in Germany was to 
secure a decision in the west before America could get ready. 


THE IMPORTANT PROBLEMS OF THE GREAT WAR 


443 


The British and French, however, so pounded the German 
lines in the fall of 1917, that even Ludendorff became so 
alarmed that he abandoned many important points. He 
greatly rejoiced when winter came, and gave his army rest. 
By the help of the Allies, the Americans had two millions of 
trained men in Europe ready for the great conflict. The 
“Meuse-Argonne Battle” was the greatest ever fought by an 
American army. Even the battle of Gettysburg was small, 
compared with it. The American army numbered nearly 
eight hundred thousand, and lost during the engagement 
about one hundred thousand. Only four thousand of these 
were prisoners, while the Americans, during the engagement, 
took more than sixty thousand German prisoners. The Amer¬ 
ican army gained all its objectives, reaching Bazeilles, near 
Sedan, and cutting the important railroad that supplied the 
German army. This place was made memorable in the battle 
of Sedan, fought in 1870. There was now nothing for the 
Germans to do but surrender. There was scarcely left them 
an important line, and their great armies had been completely 
defeated. The American victory ended the war, which might 
have been prolonged another year had it not been for this 
marvelous triumph. 

AUTOCRACY AND ITS PROBLEMS. 

Autocracy tends to become aggressive, and is unwilling to 
live in peace with its neighbors. Charles V., of Spain and 
Austria, was not satisfied with his vast dominions, but aspired 
to the rulership of all Europe. He consequently waged 
aggressive wars greatly to the injury of his own dominions, as 
well as ruinous to the rest of Europe. Louis XIV., of France, 
likewise aspired to universal dominion, and caused an alliance 
against himself that, in his old age, humiliated him to the 
very dust. Napoleon Bonaparte was so successful in his 
defensive warfare in the interest of the French Republic that, 
when he became emperor, he determined to conquer the world 
and succeeded in .arousing a combination against him that 
finally banished him to the lonely island of St. Helena. The 
author was at The Hague in 1907, when William II., of Ger¬ 
many, declared himself in favor of peace, and said he would 


444 


MACROCOSMUS 


not bring on war, for they would combine against him like 
they did against Napoleon. He came near getting the Nobel 
prize for peace. The great war has done much towards solving 
the important problems of autocracy. The German, the Russian, 
the Austrian and the Turkish Empires have all been over¬ 
thrown, and the king of Greece and the czar of Bulgaria 
have both lost their crowns. The king of Greece, however, 
has been restored, advocating more liberal principles. He has 
again lost, and his son is now king. 

DEMOCRACY AND ITS PROBLEMS. 

9 

Democracy is now triumphant in nearly all parts of the 
world, but it certainly has before it some very important 
problems. The capitalistic profiteers and the red anarchists 
are the most dangerous autocrats in the world. A plutocratic 
capitalist once said, when the rights of the public w r ere urged 
upon him: “Damn the public/’ This went the rounds of the 
papers, and produced such a reaction that the capitalists now 
appear willing to deal more fairly with the public and with 
labor. They appear now willing to arbitrate. I think this is 
also true of the majority of the laborers, but nothing can be 
done with the red anarchists. They will not learn anything 
from either history or experience. Their conduct now in 
Russia is much the same as it was during the French Revolu¬ 
tion. They can only be put down by force. The syndicalists 
look upon all capitalists as thieves and robbers. Earl C. 
Ford and William Foster, who organized the steel strike, 
are among the most radical syndicalists. Foster, when secre¬ 
tary of the Syndicalist League of America, wrote a book 
which advocates an uncompromising war between labor and 
capital. It will tolerate nothing less than the complete rule 
of labor over all classes. It can never be harmonized with 
true democracy, which teaches the government of the people, 
by the people, and for the people. 

THE INDIVIDUAL AND HIS PROBLEMS. 

The initiation of the individual is largely responsible for 
civilization. Abraham introduced a higher and purer life 
into the west, and was one of the first great missionaries. 



THE IMPORTANT PROBLEMS OP THE GREAT WAR 


445 


Moses organized a nation, which was to be a model for the 
whole world. Cyrus gave a higher culture to Asia, and was 
one of the great lights of the world. Alexander disseminated 
Greek culture throughout the Orient, and prepared the world 
for a still higher civilization. Hannibal was a forerunner of 
commerce on the western seas, and disputed empire even with 
Rome itself. Caesar conquered northern Europe, and did 
much to promote modern civilization. Bonaparte disseminated 
democracy throughout Europe, even if he did afterwards be¬ 
come an autocrat. Gustavus Adolphus crossed the Baltic and 
save Protestantism in the Thirty Years’ War. Frederick 
the Great, in alliance with England, defeated the Catholic 
powers in the Seven Years’ War, and thus guaranteed religious 
liberty to Europe. In every department of life, great leaders 
can do much good, but when cruel despots are at the head of 
affairs, humanity and progress must suffer very serious re¬ 
sults. In case William II., of Germany, had been like his 
father, the world’s great war would not have taken place, and 
the lives of nearly twenty millions of young men would have 
been saved in the interest of peace and civilization. 

SOCIALISM AND ITS PROBLEMS. 

Socialism has both its good side and its bad side. Both 
our educational system and post-office department are 
pure socialism, but we could not do without them. They are 
in the interest of true civilization. On the other hand, the 
autocratic capitalist and red anarchist are both a disgrace to 
our modern civilization. Civilization must either destroy them, 
or they will destroy it. I read in the Saturday Evening Post 
an editorial entitled “Striking Thirteen,” which was highly 
interesting. It states that several years ago capital struck 
thirteen, and became so autocratic that a reaction came, and 
the railroads and other great enterprises have not gotten 
over it yet. They positively refused to arbitrate anything, but 
now are willing to arbitrate almost everything. The people 
will not suffer any class to continue to use power immoderate¬ 
ly. Capital, like the Kaiser, is to blame for most of its 
troubles. It is to be hoped that it has undergone a change of 
heart. It appears that labor is now about ready to strike 


446 


MACROCOSMUS 


thirteen, and, when it does so, very serious consequences will 
follow. The people will never permit the unions to dictate 
to the whole country. As a matter of fact, there is much 
labor that can not be unionized, and this labor must have 
its rights. Besides, the great public will have its rights, and 
it will conquer both capital and labor, when they become 
autocratic. 

NATIONALISM AND ITS PROBLEMS. 

Nationalism readies a very high point in the progress of 
civilization, and the nation has a divine mission as well as 
the church. The small nation has had its mission as well as 
the large one. The Greeks have led the world in every depart¬ 
ment of culture, and that nation yet has before it an im¬ 
portant mission. The Jewish nation reached the highest ideals 
of any nation of antiquity, and was a model for righteous¬ 
ness for the nations of the ancient world. Switzerland has 
been a light upon the mountain-tops for true democracy to 
all the nations of modern times. Holland for 150 years held 
the balance of power in Europe. Germany was held back 
by little Belgium, until the French and English armies could 
get ready to fight the battle of the Marne. It would, however, 
be a mistake to create too many small states in Europe. As 
a rule, the large nation tends to bring peace to the world. 
If the States of the American Union were independent na¬ 
tions, instead of the one in many as we now have, there would 
be constant wars. The Supreme Court settles all the troubles 
among the States instead of the sword. While the nation 
has a divine mission, some nations, like some individuals, are 
so self-conscious that they can not live in peace with others, 
and the result is war. The ambitious purposes of Germany 
brought on the most bloody war in history, and the result 
is Germany has been defeated and ruined. God has deter¬ 
mined the times before appointed, and the bounds of the habi¬ 
tations of the nations, and the nation that takes the sword 
will perish by the sword. 

INTERNATIONALISM AND ITS PROBLEMS. 

Seven years before the great war, when the author stood 
on the foundation of the Peace Palace at The Hague, in vision 


THE IMPORTANT PROBLEMS OF THE GREAT WAR 447 


he could see the great world moving on to that period of 
universal peace. He yet has that vision, although a great 
war has intervened. If the decision of the Supreme Court in 
America can settle all troubles among the States, why can not 
the Supreme Court at The Hague, or somewhere else, settle any 
trouble that may come up among the nations? 

THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS. 

1. The League of Nations is opportune, and in perfect 
harmony with what has been done at The Hague. It can do 
for the nations of the, world what the United States is doing 
for her numerous States. There is nothing in it that can not 
be of benefit to every nation in the world. It truly repre¬ 
sents the highest internationalism. 

2. The League of Nations is right. Dr. John Clifford 

says that it is the hope of the world, and that we can not well 

have peace any other way. It inaugurates world order, in 

which reason will rule instead of destructive competition. 

3. The League of Nations promotes the brotherhood of 

mankind. While it does not solve all international problems, 
it is an organization that does provide for the operation of the 
pacific forces of the world in the settlement of any troubles 
that might arise. While it is not perfect, it is certainly in 
the right line. The people are no more divided over it than 
the people of the United States were divided over the Con¬ 
stitution when it was first adopted. 

4. It represents the high international ideals of all true re¬ 
ligion. The author had the privilege of attending the Con¬ 
gress of Religions in Chicago, and also a similar one in St. 
Louis, and the speakers of both these great parliaments plead 
for internationalism. Christianity is thoroughly international, 
and the Christ sent His apostles into all the world. 

5. Ex-President Taft delivered a lecture before the Na¬ 
tional Geographic Society on the League of Nations, in which 
he advocated in the strongest terms its adoption. Much the 
same position was taken by President Lowell, of Harvard 
University. It is perfectly safe to say that nearly all the lead¬ 
ing educators of America favor the League of Nations. The 

League of Nations clearly appears to be the rational thing to 


448 


MACROCOSMUS 


promote the peace of the world, and to .advance true civiliza¬ 
tion. 

6. It represents the highest ideals of international law. It 
would be well if even the members of the United States Con¬ 
gress had made a more thorough study of international law. 
I well remember when, a number of years ago, I heard ex- 
President Woolsey, of Yale University, deliver a course of lec¬ 
tures on this important science. The time has come for all to 
rise above an extreme nationalism, and think more and more 
in the terms of internationalism. 

7. The League of Nations must stimulate international com¬ 
merce. Commerce has always been one of the most important 
means of advancing civilization. A wise league must, in 
the nature of things, stimulate trade in all parts of the 
world, and the nations of the world will more fully understand 
the meaning of the word ‘‘reciprocity.” 

8. A national league can not otherwise than promote 
higher education in all parts of the world. There will be a 
greater exchange of professors among the leading universities, 
and the best thought will be disseminated everywhere. 

9. A League of Nations will not destroy nationalism, but 
will tend more and more to give it a higher sanity. There is 
certainly nothing in the League of Nations out of harmony 
with the Constitution of the United States. The league, like 
our Constitution, can be amended when necessary. 

10. The League of Nations will certainly tend to promote 
the peace of the world. It inspires the nations with hope 
after the pessimism following such a dreadful war. Frank II. 
Simonds, of the American Review of Reviews, is probably 
the sanest critic who has written extensively on the great war, 
and he has plainly shown the important concessions that 
Great Britain and France have made to secure the co-operation 
of the United States in the interest of this important league. 

11. The league would greatly benefit Christian missionaries 
in different parts of the world. It would put an end to such 
persecution as the Armenians are now suffering from the 
ruthless Turks. The representatives of the Red Cross are 
now pleading with the United States and others to save this 
ancient race from extermination. 


the important problems of the great war 449 

12. The highest culture in the world now points to an 
international league as essential in order that civilization 
may realize its highest ideals. Some years ago, as a member 
of the New York Academy of Political Science, Columbia 
University, I became convinced of the sanity of Dr. Shaw, 
editor of the Review of Reviews, on all political problems. I 
have also, for years, read his magazine, and find that he is 
perfectly fair to all parties. He is an earnest advocate of 
the League of Nations. He claims that ex-President Wilson’s 
position at Paris was sane and sensible, and that the Sena¬ 
tors who were opposing it, in case they had gone to Paris, would 
probably have advocated it. He further claims that Wash¬ 
ington, Jefferson, Webster, Clay and Calhoun, all practically 
took the same view. Presidents Cleveland, McKinley and 
Roosevelt represented the same ideas. In fact, Senator Lodge, 
for more than forty years, stood for much the same thing. In 
his old age, Jefferson wanted the United States to stand by 
England, and free all South America. Dr. Shaw thinks that 
the Government and the Senate should get together, and, for 
the peace of the world, sign the treaty, better without the 
reservations, but even the reservations could not seriously 
affect the treaty. Great Britain could not go to war without 
Parliament, and the United States without Congress, so what 
do the reservations amount to after all? They can not seri¬ 
ously change the relation of Japan to China, or the relation of 
Great Britain to Ireland. To separate Ireland from Great 
Britain would be much the same as separating Florida from 
the United States. It would be a death-blow to both of them. 
They should have local self-government, but entire independence 
would be insanity. 

The Washington Conference really supplemented the League 
of Nations on the great question of disarmament. Either 
the League of Nations, or something very similar, must ulti¬ 
mately triumph. 










' 



















V^SJTTT' C$s -Ct ^ ^ ^ O' 

'* ' --*•. Oj f 0 c °, 1 ♦ , 

y 
y* 
<* 
« 





* A' '<P\ v> 

<, ”*/YV s''a a '%. '*0 • *■ * A 0> v 

" .# v * 1 « °o fO- , c 

SX C O jy\ 

« o e ' * *" vr 


s .. S* 

'SJ*, % V , 


V V 




/ ; 
p°*. *. 

t » 0 > > ® * ' * ^ s ’ * / ^ ^ o N 0 \^ \ ti q 

■e. *' 4 ®^* %> v * Va1m?a> 

^ <V' U ''^ ^ - - '%><(? * ; w-t'/ % ® 



* _N\>J£r /h ' c O* e "■ 7X?*+<71R « 
v - v - o </ ^p_ o 

-x /*.' . ■* '■*. .• • * v . c£* * ' A C. 

0 * ■*■ tV' <V. ^ , . S A ’-^ f „ - , * ,£> 

** ^o^ c° n ° 

■ * - >,. .v „ . 0 

o o x 

© 


^ V 
O 0 


c ° .* c 

^ ^ ° x ’ ' 

\*‘->'t,?‘'*J ) °o/%, 

»'*»/ > .o'" s' 7 - * '■fe. 3 N 




r* 


.A 

*r 

o 

/ 


** 

O 

o 

■b 

•/' 


Z 

o 

s> 






f * 

J -7*. S 

; ^ k 

> Or ^ ^ / v ✓> 

* A *V ^<01*** a C* % 

V s- ' ‘ 0 ' '"> * 1 ’ ./ s'" 

*W*; ^ A*’S*to*'. 3 





'' % / 3 ° s 

-m&*. >bo' 


;• % ° ^ -^. 

' ,0° c i. v , s' v'J- 5 ’ ' *, ‘s^V o ’ C> 

N 0 •X' tf'. »,|1* .0 O 

V *’♦•.> s'" ',. ■ 

.v, a s jetBhP' 


»,,,-' 0 J -O 

> 1 .o'* .'VVp, %. 

(J 


V %■ - ^ 


sO ,. s 'o.y* x? 

s/V^LS b O f 0* 

v .v ' 

^ v • &ri^ t ■‘b o' •.» 




y 

s * * / ^/> * 3 N 0 ' .^' 

- Vi> ^ ‘illltr* %%< 

^ ■'* « . A^’ 

op v * v • - * 0 . 

s\ * + ° 0 ’ 


,v ^ z ^/ 

, w . 

' **'\v .Hi. ^-" y ° • ' * 



0 A V ^ ,0' 

0°‘ . l IT •/"<%. 

*bo*» ^ ^ 


jS X - " 



m rf 

P* ^ \ j , 'V oV” ^ V 

S s A O, ^ 0 * X "* \0 

a\ .v., -?- 0 t c °- -• *;'%, " j> , 

^ ^ ^ -\ w 

^ v) ^ l /v . -j -- \ 4 •» r *> ; * ..*/' 

<H ^ W/ * \° t VT^- 5 ' - oH %< 

^ jr -s. +^<J}-** 0 ' c . yv^/; o.^ 

r *y % \> ^ > x9 4 s * 'G. v *' V. ^ 

%* ^ v, r ■■ & /V' ^ \ <<• ft, »Vv, ), ^ 

— V I - / 

psJns!. \'ss'-A a V .n or //AV^\ VS cc r* >^> sS-awinnnnfe'-<? ^ 

* ' 

- A^ <v 

/ * 


^ V • » e , 

•‘ ^ % c° .« 

•s , -V . 

W 

. > \V * <££• 

ft. cf% /, ? 

*>. * 

/■ X 













